i^<r 
 
 -<o' .^ar 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 \^r 
 
 ^T «r 
 
^ v.^ 
 
 X5^ ^^-1^ 
 
 ^s^^- 
 
 
 fl 
 
 
 p^^ 
 
 L^Y^^^i^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 *jj 
 
 BJ^^j^^^^ 
 
 S^^H 
 
 ' -11 1 -"^"^"^^ 
 
 CW^?«^ 
 
 «c.^ <:^.x.-<r: 
 
 ^s- caL«i 
 
 ^&S; 
 
 5^^ <5- 
 
 ^^^^^^ 
 
 ■<r- <citr 
 
 ^^ 
 
 4^SZ^^Z 
 
 
•"-^ 
 
 ^e.^^^" 
 
 '^ re 
 •J - 
 
 
 'siJ>A 
 
 f^D^ 
 

 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2013 
 
 http://archive.org/details/memoir'sillustraOOwins 
 
F R N T I S r 1 E C E. 
 
 C. WlNbloN. 
 
 l"Kll.ll' H. UEI.AMOTTE. 
 
 GERMAN GLASS. 
 
 FROM THE COLXXCTION OP^ THE LATE LOUD HERBERT OF LEA. 
 
MEMOIRS 
 
 ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE ART OF 
 
 GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 BY THE LATE CHARLES WINSTON 
 
 OF THI-: INNER TE3I1 LE. 
 
 ILLUSTKATED WITH ENGRAVINGS, FROM THE AUTHOR S ORIGINAL DRAWINGS, 
 BY PHILIP H. DELAMOTTE. F.S A. 
 
 LONDON: 
 JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, 
 
 1865. 
 
 Tht right of Travslalion is reserve'l. 
 
LONDON : PRINTED BV WILLIAM GLOMES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET, 
 AND CHARING CROSS. 
 
PEEFACE. 
 
 The present collection of Memoirs by the late Mr. Winston is 
 published by some of his friends out of regard to his memory, 
 and in a belief that to bring together in a convenient form 
 much information and many critical remarks on glass-painting, 
 hitherto dispersed through numerous volumes, will be acceptable 
 to those who interest themselves in the art. 
 
 The occasions on which the Memoirs were written, as well as 
 their subjects, sufficiently appear from the table of contents, 
 and require no observation at present. In arranging them 
 chronological order has been observed ; but a reader little 
 acquainted with glass-painting may find it convenient to dis- 
 regard this arrangement, and to read first the * Lecture delivered 
 before the Working-men's Association at Lichfield,' which con- 
 tains a popular and comprehensive view of the whole subject. 
 This lecture, as well as part of the Memoir on the Painted Glass 
 in Lincoln Cathedral, might serve as an introduction to a know- 
 ledge of the art. 
 
 The chronological order has been observed, because it was 
 thought desirable to show the progress of Mr. Winston's opinions, 
 and any modifications they may have undergone in a long series 
 of years ; but, from the consistency and steadiness of his views, 
 the latter seem to be very slight. The most material point on 
 which he altered an opinion is noticed at length in the Bio- 
 graphical Memoir. 
 
 The Memoirs having been written at different times, and 
 frequently treating of the same or very similar topics, some 
 repetitions occur in them. These could not have been removed 
 without too much interference with other matter with which 
 they are connected ; for they are not mere repetitions. In only 
 two cases have passages been omitted as such, and therefore use- 
 less. These are noticed in the proper places. 
 
 h 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 No alterations have been made in the Memoirs beyond the 
 correction of a few trifling and evident mistakes. 
 
 The notes to the Memoirs are those which were originally 
 attached to them, except a very few merely giving necessary 
 explanations and references. These are generally placed be- 
 tween brackets, besides being sufficiently distinguishable from 
 the others by their contents. 
 
 The letters to Mr. Charles Heath Wilson were not furnished 
 by him with a view to their publication ; but when examined, 
 parts of them seemed of sufficient general interest to be included 
 in this volume. The selection of such as are now published 
 was not made by him, nor had he an opportunity of seeing it 
 till after the letters were printed. Two or three of the remarks 
 then made by him are given in the corrections and additions. 
 
 The plates and vignettes are all taken from Mr. Winston's 
 drawings of glass-paintings. The diagrams and illustrations 
 originally accompanying a few of the Memoirs^ are republished, 
 except four plates illustrative of the painted glass in Salisbury 
 Cathedral. Those originally given were executed according to 
 a process then new, and are spoken of in the Memoir, and in 
 a note to it, as " rough." New coloured lithogi'aphs from Mr. 
 Winston's drawings of the same subjects have, therefore, been 
 now substituted for them. 
 
 A short index has been added for convenience of reference 
 to subjects which might not be readily found by means of the 
 table of contents. 
 
 1 Namely, those on Wiucliester, York, Lincoln, Gloucester, and the Beauchamp 
 Cliapel, Warwick. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 I'AGi-: 
 Biographical Memoir .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 
 
 Appendix to Biographical Memoir — containing Letters to Mr. 0. fl. 
 Wilson respecting the Painted Windows for Glasgow Cathedral. 
 
 1856. 
 
 I. — March 21. Glass-painters have yet to be formed — Byzantine origin 
 
 of the style of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries .. .. ..18 
 
 II. — April 4. An inferior kind of the new glass manufactured — The 
 genuine new glass equals the old — No nineteenth-century style of 
 glass-painting adapted to Gothic buildings of the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries — Byzantine origin of the art of the latter 
 period — In glass-paintings for buildings of that time recourse 
 should be had to the Antique — Asceticism condemned — Choice 
 of subjects for Lincoln Cathedral .. .. .. .. ..19 
 
 III. — April 20. Prints give no correct idea of the effect of glass-paintings 
 — In designing for glass-paintings a knowledge of the material is 
 necessary — Hedgeland — Excellence of the west window at Norwich 21 
 
 1857. 
 
 IV. — February 11. Eemarks on the Norwich windows — Of dulling glass 23 
 
 V. — February 15. Account of a discussion with Baron M. . . . . 25 
 
 YI. — March 8. The employment of foreign artists recommended in order 
 
 that the whole work may be by the same hand . . . . . . 26 
 
 VII. — March 12. German figures not sufficiently severe for the thirteenth- 
 century style — Risk of having the figures and patterns inharmonious 
 if two artists are employed — Artistic figures preferable to observance 
 of antiquarianism . , , . . . . . . . . . . . 27 
 
 VIII. — March 16. Antiquarianism to be rejected if incompatible with 
 good figures — If Munich artists are employed, a style as late as 
 the fifteenth century is recommended . . . . . . . . . . 28 
 
 IX. — March 25. As to striking out a new style — Reference to his book 
 
 on that point — Remarks on a design, and on the treatment of canopies 29 
 
 X. — April 6. The mediasval mode of treating canopies the result of 
 
 ignorance .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..30 
 
 XI. — May 18. Remarks on a ioreign design — The Gei-man foliage better 
 
 suited to a poor material than that of the thirteenth century . . 31 
 
 XII. — No date. Example from Angers Cathedral that a later style does 
 
 not necessitate an alteration of the plan of afi earlier design . . . . 32 
 
 XIII.— May 24. Remarks on a design 32 
 
 XIV. — June 11. Gothic forms objected to — Faults of the Houses of 
 
 Parliament .. .. ,. .. .. .. .. ..34 
 
 XV. — June 18. The Munich artists must be made to understand what 
 
 kind of design is wanted . . . . , . . . . . . . 34 
 
 XVI. — June 26. Mediseval artists followed the style of their own age, 
 
 without reference to archa?olog;y .. .. ., .. ,.35 
 
 h2 
 
VI CONTENTS, 
 
 PAGE 
 
 XVII. — August 15. Eeason for employing Munich artists — In what 
 respect Hedgeland and Nixon are better — Experiment of the Temple 
 windows .. .. .. ,, .. ,. .. .. ..36 
 
 XVIII. — August 18. In ancient glass-paintings regard is had to the 
 quality of the material — How fifteenth- century artists would have 
 treated an ancient design — Early English and Decorated styles 
 compared , . . . . . . . . . , , . . , . . . 38 
 
 XIX. — September 1. Wall-decorations — How far landscape backgrounds 
 
 are admissible in them and in glass-paintings .. .. .. ..40 
 
 XX. — September 17. English glass-painting does not improve — Eemarks 
 
 on two windows in B Church — Objection to small groups of 
 
 figures — Gothic not the architectural style for the nineteenth century 41 
 
 XXI. — October. Periods of the termination of pure Byzantine, and of the 
 perfection of Mediaeval art — Badness of figures in the Decorated style 
 — Early English a development of archaic Greek — Superior to 
 Decorated .. ,. .. ,. .. .. .. ..42 
 
 XXII. — November 8. La patina — Method of producing the effect of 
 
 age on glass-paintings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 
 
 XXIII. — Of touching up glass-paintings with colours not burned in — Of 
 
 two new windows in the Temple .. .. .. .. ..46 
 
 XXIV. — December 26. In what respect Nicholas Pisano was recom- 
 mended in a former letter — Of modified thirteenth-century orna- 
 mentation .. .. .. .. ., .. .. .. 47 
 
 1860. 
 XXV. — March 24. The old glass-painters disregarded principle . . 48 
 
 1861. 
 
 XXVI. — September 22. Excellence of the Glasgow windows, and critical 
 
 examination of them with reference to those of Lichfield .. .. 49 
 
 XXVII. — October 16. Copy of a letter to Herr Ainmiiller on the Glasgow 
 windows — Their superiority to all his other works attributed to the 
 disuse of enamel colours .. .. .. .. .. ..53 
 
 1862. 
 XXVIII. — April 5. Of the treatment of the clearstory windows in 
 
 Glasgow Cathedral, and references to examples .. .. ..56 
 
 XXIX. — June 23. French and German artists look more to fame and 
 
 less to profit than the English ,. .. .. .. .. ..56 
 
 1863. 
 XXX. — January 18. Remarks on some lights intended for Glasgow, by 
 
 Mr. Hughes .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..57 
 
 XXXI. — October 26. On the painted glass in Gloucester Cathedral and 
 
 Nettlestead Church, Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 
 
 XXXII. — December 7. Of clearstory windows .. .. .. ..59 
 
 1864. 
 XXXIII. — January 15. Mischief of Medijeval mania — Inconsistency of 
 Gothic architecture with modern refinement — Only two courses to 
 be followed in designing windows for Medieval churches .. .. 60 
 
CONTENTS. vii 
 
 MEMOIRS ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 I. — A Short Notice of the Painted Glass in Winchester and its 
 Neighbourhood. 
 
 [From the volume of the Proceedings of the Aichgeological Institute at Winchester, 1845,] 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Classification of glass-paintings .. .. .. .. .. ..63 
 
 Specimens of Early English at St. Cross, and in two boxes in Winchester 
 
 College .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..64 
 
 Specimens of Decorated in St. Cross, and in the Cathedral and the College 64 
 Perpendicular more abundant . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 
 
 Modera glass in the College . . . . . . . . . . • . . . 66 
 
 Sixteenth-century glass the only glass that can now be successfully 
 
 imitated .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..67 
 
 Glass in east window of the College Library . , . . . . . . 68 
 
 Arms of Cardinal Beaufort in the Refectory of St. Cross .. .. ..68 
 
 East window of the Choir of the Cathedral . . . . . . . . . . 68 
 
 Heraldic glass of James I. and Charles I. in the Library of the Deanery .. 69 
 
 n. — On the Painted Glass in the Cathedral and Churches of 
 
 York. 
 
 [From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archseological Institute at York, July, 1846.] 
 
 Portion of a Jesse, the oldest glass in England .. .. .. ..71 
 
 The Five Sisters 72 
 
 The glass in the Chapter-house .. .. .. .. .. ..72 
 
 In the Nave of the Cathedral . . . . . . . . . . . , 73 
 
 The earliest Perpendicular glass in the Cathedral . . . . . . . . 73 
 
 The white glass less green than in the west and south of England , , 74 
 
 Glass-painting from Eouen presented by Lord Carlisle . . . , . . 74 
 
 in. — An Account of the Painted Glass in Lincoln Cathedral and 
 Southwell Minster. 
 
 [From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute, at the Annual 
 Meeting at Lincoln, 1848.] 
 
 Origin of glass-painting . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 77 
 
 Meaning of white glass, coloured glass. Pot-metal glass, coated or flashed 
 
 glass 79 
 
 Description of the method of Theophilus, or Mosaic system . . . . 79 
 
 The enamel system of glass-painting ., .. ,. .. .,81 
 
 The Early English, Decorated, Perpendicular, and Cinquecento })eriods .. 83 
 The works of the Van Linges, and of the Prices , . . . , . . . 85 
 
 The great Rose or Wheel window in the Cathedral . . , . . . 85 
 
 Notice of some places where there are specimens of eaily glass-paintings 
 
 in England (note) ,. ,. .... ., .. ..85 
 
Viil CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGK 
 
 The glass in the other windows of the Cathedral .. .. ,. .,88 
 
 The glass in Southwell Minster . . , . . . . . . , . . 89 
 
 Observations on the present state of glass-painting .. ,. ..90 
 
 Of the harmony of a glass-painting with architecture .. .. ..91 
 
 How far Gothic glass-paintings harmonize with Gothic architecture .. 91 
 
 Gothic pattern glass-paintings harmonize with Gothic architecture, but 
 
 Gothic picture glass-paintings do so imperfectly ,. .. ..92 
 The quality of the modern material an additional cause of defective 
 
 harmony in modern imitations of them .. .. .. ..95 
 
 Suggestions for obtaining harmony between the glass-paintings and the 
 
 architecture by colouring .. ,. .. .. ,. ..97 
 
 Of the flatness of mediaival glass-paintings ,. .. .. .. .. 101 
 
 Of Picture-windows for Perpendicular and Classical Buildings .. .. 104 
 
 IV. — On the Painted Glass at Salisbuky. 
 
 [From the volume of Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Salisbury, 1849,] 
 
 Destruction of painted glass during Wyatt's " restoration " . . . . 106 
 
 The original glass of the Cathedral and Chapter-house .. .. .. 108 
 
 Pemains of a " Stem of Jesse " .. .. .. .. .. .. 108 
 
 The medallion pictures .. .. .. .. .. .. ,. 110 
 
 The shields of arms .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 112 
 
 The ornamental patterns in the Cathedral and Chapter-house .. ..115 
 
 Progressive change in ornamental patterns , . ., .. .. ..117 
 
 Ornamented borders to the pattern-windows ,. -,. .. ..119 
 
 Painted glass in St. Thomas's Church 122 
 
 In the hall of John Halle 123 
 
 Perpendicular and Cinquecento glass in the Cathedral .. .. .. 124 
 
 Arms of Bishop Jewell .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 125 
 
 The modern glass in the Cathedral designed by Reynolds, and executed 
 
 by Eginton .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 125 
 
 The Lifting up of the Brazen Serpent, by Pearson . . , . . . . . 126 
 
 The introduction of landscapes into mural-paintings and glass-paintings 
 
 defended .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 127 
 
 V. — On the Painted Glass in New College Chapel and Hall, 
 
 Oxford. 
 [From the Archaeological Journal, vol. ix., March, 1852.] 
 
 Dispersion of the remains of the original glazing .. ,. .. .. 131 
 
 Fragments in boxes at Winchester College .. .. .. .. .. 131 
 
 The northernmost west window of the Antechapel .. .. .. .. 132 
 
 The first north window of the Antechapel from the west .. .. .. 134 
 
 The second ditto .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 135 
 
 The two east windows of the Antechapel ,. .. .. .. .. 136 
 
 The south window of the Antechapel ,. .. .. .. .. 143 
 
 The southernmost west window ditto .. .. .. .. .. 144 
 
 Remarks on the date, style, and general effect of the original glazing of 
 
 the chapel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • 145 
 
 One of the earliest specimens of Perpendicular ,. .. .. .. 146 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 IX 
 
 Smear-shading stippled (an invention of the early part of the 14th 
 
 century) differs from stij^ple-shading . . . . . . . . . . 147 
 
 The beauty of the windows is derived from the fine tone and harmony of 
 
 the colom-ing, and its perfect keeping with the architecture .. .. 147 
 
 The glass of the choir windows . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 
 
 First south window from the east .. ., .. .. .. ..150 
 
 The second .. ,. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 151 
 
 The third 152 
 
 The fourth 152 
 
 The fifth 152 
 
 Tracery lights — First north window from the east .. .. .. 154 
 
 The second, third, fourth, fifth 154 
 
 The great west window in the Antechapel designed by Keynolds .. 155 
 
 The painted glass in the hall windows .. .. .. .. .. 156 
 
 Coats of arms .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 156 
 
 Supplementarj'- note .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 158 
 
 VI. — On the Painted Glass at Bristol, Wells, Gloucester, and 
 
 Exeter. 
 [From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Bristol, 1851.] 
 
 The east window in Bristol Cathedral judiciously restored .. .. 160 
 
 Eepresents a stem of Jesse .. .. .. .. .. .. ..161 
 
 Its probable date 1320 162 
 
 The glass in the side windows of the choir . . .. .. .. ..162 
 
 Its probable date . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . 165 
 
 The rest of the glass in the Cathedral .. .. .. .. ..166 
 
 The glass in the Mayor's Chapel .. .. .. .. .. ..167 
 
 The glass in Wells Cathedral 167 
 
 The east window of the choir of singular design .. ., .. .. 168 
 
 The glass in Gloucester Cathedral . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 
 
 The great east window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 
 
 On what its effect depends .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 170 
 
 Some interesting Decorated and Perpendicular specimens . . .. .. 171 
 
 The glass in Exeter Cathedral .. .. .. .. .. ,. 171 
 
 Eepeated examination of ancient glass necessary to appreciate 
 
 peculiarities .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 172 
 
 Architecture and glass-painting unreasonably regarded as of purely 
 
 ecclesiastical interest .. .. .. .. .. .. ..172 
 
 Misapplication of the epithets Pagan and Christian . . . . . . 172 
 
 The difterence between the ancient and modern material maintained .. 173 
 
 VII. — On a Revived Manufacture of Coloured Glass used in 
 
 Ancient Windows. 
 
 [From the Transactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 1852.] 
 
 Of the harmony between the design and execution of the earliest glass- 
 paintings, and the quality of the material .. .. .. .. 175 
 
 Simplicity of the design and execution of the earliest glass-i)aintings .. 175 
 Their flatness the result of circumstances, not of principle . . . . . . 176 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Contrast exhibited by the glass-paintings of the 16tli century .. .. 177 
 Difference between the quahty of the glass of this period and that of the 
 
 12th and 13th centuries 177 
 
 Harmony between the material and the mode of working it, from the 
 
 cessation of the early fiat style to the adoption of the rotund or 
 
 pictorial .. .. .. .. .. .. .. •• •• 178 
 
 Changes in the quality of the material previously and subsequently to the 
 
 middle of the l-ith century .. .. .. .. .. .. 178 
 
 Harmony between the material and the mode of working it since the 
 
 middle of the 16th century .. .. .. .. .. .. 179 
 
 Difference of effect between the early glass -paintings and the imitations of 
 
 them .. 180 
 
 Method of testing the proper opaqueness of glass .. .. .. .. 180 
 
 Of an liquating glass .. ,. .. .. .. .. .. .. 181 
 
 Difference between the colours of ancient and modern glass . . . . 181 
 
 Of the revived manufacture of coloured glass .. .. .. .. 182 
 
 Analyses by Dr. Medlock, and their result , . . . . . . . . . 182 
 
 Ai)peal to the architects to promote the improvement of glass-painting .. 183 
 
 Injurious' influence of the false estimate of the middle ages . . . . . . 184 
 
 VIII. — On the Methods of Painting upon Glass : an Explanation 
 GIVEN at a Meeting of the Eoyal Institute of British Archi- 
 tects, March 7, 1853. 
 
 [F)'om the Transactions of the Institute.] 
 
 Fitness of the enamel system of glass-painting for cabinet works .. .. 186 
 
 Beautiful work by Valsecchi of Milan ., .. .. .. .. 186 
 
 The objection to the use of lead work -in the mosaic system equally 
 
 applicable to the enamel system . . . . . . . . , , 187 
 
 The mosaic sj'stem the best for large works , . .. .. .. .. 187 
 
 Remarks on Bertini's 'Dante and his Thoughts,' in the Exhibition of 1851 187 
 The windows in St. Gudule's, Brussels, and in Lichfield Cathedral, the 
 
 most perfect specimens of glass-painting .. .. .. .. 188 
 
 .. 189 
 
 .. 189 
 
 .. 189 
 
 .. 189 
 
 The practice of Capronnier and Bertini opposed to this opinion 
 
 The Temple windows . . . . 
 
 Effect of silver-coloured glass 
 
 Ancient practice of putting tinfoil behind glass 
 
 IX. — On the Application of Painted Glass to Buildings in various 
 
 Styles of Architecture. 
 
 (Read at a Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Nov. 28, 1853.) 
 
 [From the Transactions of the Institute.] 
 
 Of the best subjects for glass-paintings ., .. .. .. ,. 191 
 
 Pattern windows comply with the conditions of glass-painting .. .. 192 
 
 So do the picture-windows of the 12th and 13th centuries .. .. 193 
 
 The simple composition of such windows .. .. .. .. ,. 193 
 
 The picture-windows of the Cinquccento period, and their composition .. 194 
 Examples in Brussels and Lichfield Cathedrals referred to .. ..195 
 
 Of the glass-paintings of the 14th and 15th centuries, and their inferiority 196 
 
CONTENTS. xi 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Glass-paintings of the 12tli and 13th centiuies harmonize best with 
 
 Norman and Early English buildmgs, ou account of their colouring 198 
 Cinquecento glass-paintings, though not inferior in power, do not so well 
 
 harmonize with them .. .. .. .. ., .. .. 199 
 
 What glass-painting will harmonize with the Greek style .. .. 201 
 
 Ancient sculpture and tessellated pavements might afibrd hints .. .. 202 
 
 The proper degree of relief considered .. .. .. .. .. 203 
 
 What glass-painting will suit Palladian buildings .. .. .. .. 203 
 
 Objections to receding pictures in glass-painting considered .. .. 205 
 
 How a 19th-century ^vindow may harmonize with early buildings .. 208 
 
 Change in glass-painting, and in the manufacture, about 1380 .. .. 209 
 
 The same scale of figures should be preserved throughout a window .. 211 
 
 Designs extending beyond a single light ., .. .. .. .. 211 
 
 Defence of some remarks in the ' Hints on Glass-painting ' .. .. 213 
 
 X. — On the Resemblance between Medleval and Classical Art as 
 
 EXEMPLIFIED IN THE G LASS-PAINTINGS OF THE 12TH AND 13tH 
 
 Centuries. 
 
 (Read at the Ordinary Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, June 16, 
 
 1856.) 
 
 [From the Transactions of the Institute.] 
 
 Influence exerted by classical antiquity through Byzantium .. .. 216 
 
 Probability that glass-painting in the "West was first practised at 
 Limoges, and that the earliest coloured glass was made from 
 
 Byzantine receipts .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 217 
 
 Resemblance of early glass -paintings to the illuminations of Greek MSS. 218 
 
 Resemblance of the costume to the antique .. ., .. .. 219 
 
 Expediency of studying antique models . . . . . . . . . . 220 
 
 XI. — On the Glazing of the North Rose Window of Lincoln 
 
 Cathedral. 
 
 [From the Archaeological Journal, vol, siv. 1857.] 
 
 Judicious restoration of this window .. .. .. .. .. 222 
 
 The subjects in the window described .. .. .. .. .. 222 
 
 The date of the original glazing is the end of the 12th or beginning of the 
 
 13th century .. " 225 
 
 The colours of the glass examined . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 
 
 Of the Ruby glass in the window, and remarks on Ruby glass .. .. 226 
 
 The influence of Greek art may be discovered in the drawing and in the 
 
 draperies .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. 228 
 
 Objections to the Renaissance, as Pagan, are unreasonable .. .. 230 
 
 XII. — A Lecture on Glass-painting, delivered before the Working 
 Man's Association at Lichfield, 1859. 
 
 Definition of a glass-painting ... .. .. .. .. .. 231 
 
 The usual practice in giass-paintings at present .. .. .. .. 232 
 
xii CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGK 
 
 Mode of making glass .. .. .. .. .. .. •• 233 
 
 Of colouring it .. .. .. .. .. •• •• •• 234 
 
 The windows of St. Sophia had coloured glass .. .. .. .. 235 
 
 Discovery of the art of painting on glass . . . . . . . . . . 236 
 
 The treatise of Theophilus ., .. .. .. .. .. .. 237 
 
 The earliest known specimens of glass-painting .. .. .. .. 238 
 
 Division of glass- paintings into picture-windows and pattern -windows .. 238 
 
 Of the former into Medallion, Jesse, and Figure and Canopy windows .. 238 
 
 The usual style of a Medallion witjdow .. .. .. .. .. 238 
 
 The Jesse window, and Figure and Canopy window .. .. .. 241 
 
 Influence of Greek art .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 241 
 
 Period from which modern art dates .. .. .. .. .. 242 
 
 (Jhange introduced into glass-iiainting by mullions .. .. .. 243 
 
 Introduction of the yellow stain .. .. .. .. .. .. 244 
 
 Change in the manufacture of glass about 1370, accompanied with a 
 
 change in the mode of painting it ., .. .. .. .. 245 
 
 Figure and Canopy windows prevalent during the Perpendicular style of 
 
 architecture .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 245 
 
 The onl}'- two ways of producing a picture on glass .. .. .. 246 
 
 The Renaissance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 
 
 Glass-painting partook of the improvement of painting in the 15th 
 
 century .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 248 
 
 Glass-painting reached its excellence between 1530 and 1550, and then 
 
 began to decline .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 248 
 
 The Lead-work and Saddle-bars are to be taken into account in designs 
 
 for glass-paintings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 
 
 Of the shading of glass- paintings . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 
 
 Notice of the window-s in Lichfield and Brussels Cathedrals, and of 
 
 subsequent works previously to the recent revival .. .. .. 251 
 
 The Munich school of glass-painting .. .. ,. .. .. 252 
 
 Defective, but superior to the English .. .. .. .. .. 253 
 
 Glass-painting not judiciously cultivated .. .. .. .. .. 254 
 
 XIIL — On an Heraldic Window in the North Aisle of the Nave of 
 York Cathedral. By Charles Winston and Weston Styleman 
 Walford. 
 
 [From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xvii, I860.] 
 
 Extensive remains of painted glass of the 14th century in York Cathedral 256 
 General description of the window which forms the subject of this 
 
 memoir .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ,. 257 
 
 Its detailed description according to a diagram .. .. .. .. 258 
 
 Armorial bearings described .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 263 
 
 Life of Peter de Dene .. .. .. 265 
 
 The donor of the window .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 272 
 
 The heraldry in the window examined to ascertain its date .. .. 272 
 
 The royal escutcheons .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 272 
 
 The arms on the surcotes of the figures in the middle light .. .. 274 
 
 The date of the window most probably 1306 or 1307 .. .. .. 277 
 
CONTENTS. XlU 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Of the origin of the double-headed eagle .. .. .. .. .. 278 
 
 Some of tlie earliest examples of it . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 
 
 Note, examining the heraldry in other windows of the nave .. ..281 
 
 Supplementary note on the Bell-founder's window . . . . . . 284 
 
 XIV. — An Account of the Painted Glass in the East Window of 
 Gloucester Cathedral. 
 
 [From the Archseological Journal, vol. xx., 1863.] 
 
 Inference as to the country in which Gothic architecture originated, drawn 
 
 from the size of the windows .. .. .. .. .. .. 285 
 
 Change which took place in the manufacture of glass, and its influence on 
 
 glass-painting .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 286 
 
 The stone-work in the east window of the Perpendicular style, the 
 
 painted glass a pure example of Decorated . . . . . , . . 286 
 
 General design of the glass-painting., .. .. .. .. .. 2«6 
 
 The originality of the present arrangement of the glass examined .. 291 
 
 Unnecessary expense avoided by mediaeval artists .. .. .. 292 
 
 The leading subject of the design was the Enthronement of the Virgin .. 293 
 
 Detailed description of it .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 294 
 
 The heraldry in the window examined .. .. .. .. .. 300 
 
 The date of the window fixed by it .. .. .. .. .. .. 305 
 
 The window probably given by Lord Bradeston .. .. ,. .. 306 
 
 Mischief of restorations .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30.S 
 
 Judicious restoration of this window . . . . . . . . . . 308 
 
 Cost of, and estimates for, the restoration (note) .. .. .. ,. 309 
 
 The fine tone and rich hue of the glass • 309 
 
 Defective execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 
 
 XV.— Remarks on the Painted Glass at Lichfield Cathedral. 
 
 [From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xxi., 1864.] 
 
 The glass-paintings brought from the dissolved Abbey of Herckenrode . . 312 
 
 Influence of the Renaissance apparent in these windows .. .. .. 313 
 
 The style in which they are executed defended .. .. .. .. 313 
 
 Flatness in glass-paintings considered .. .. .. .. .. 315 
 
 Errors in the works of the Renaissance .. .. .. .. .. 316 
 
 Manner in which the difficulties of the art have been met, and its 
 
 resources developed, in these windows .. .. .. .. .. 317 
 
 Recommendation of the study of them . . . . . . . . . . 320 
 
 The Munich school of glass-painting, and their altered practice displayed 
 
 at Glasgow .. .. .. .. .• .. .. •• 320 
 
 Subjects of the windows (note) . . . . . . . . . . . . 322 
 
 Description of, and remarks on, the windows in Brussels Cathedi-al (note) 323 
 
 Notice of the author's death (note) . . .. .. .. .. .. 325 
 
XIV 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 XVI. — The Painted Glass in the Beauchamp Chapel at Warwick. 
 
 (A Memoir read at the Annual Meeting of the Archa;ological Institute at Warwick, 
 July 26, 1864.) 
 
 [From the Archaeological Journal, vol. xxi. 1864.] 
 
 Extracts from Sir William Dugdale's account of the windows 
 
 Brief survey of the side windows of the chapel 
 
 Description of the east window 
 
 Examination of the present arrangement of the glass 
 
 Remarks on the heraldry 
 
 Description of the figure of the Virgin 
 
 Remarks on a head of Christ 
 
 Further description of the window .. 
 
 The contract with the glass-painter .. 
 
 Remarks on the execution of the work 
 
 Comparison with the Lichfield windows 
 
 Notice of the author's death . . ... 
 
 PAGE 
 
 ,. 326 
 
 ,. 327 
 
 .. 329 
 
 ,. 333 
 
 ,. 334 
 
 ,. 336 
 
 .. 337 
 
 .. 338 
 
 .. 339 
 
 .. 339 
 
 .. 340 
 
 .. 340 
 
 Catalogue of Drawings of Glas 
 Winston 
 
 Index.. 
 
 -Paintings, by the late Charles 
 
 343 
 359 
 
 Shield, with I. H. S., from Much Hadham Church, Herts. 
 
LISr OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 Figure of a Bishop, from German glass, in the collection of the late Loixl 
 Herbert of Lea, supposed date about 1505. (This plate is presented 
 to this volume by the Eev. J. L. Petit.) Frontispiece. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Shield, with I. H. S., from Much Hadham Church, Herts xiv 
 
 Portrait of late Charles Winston to face 1 
 
 Fragment of foliage from Cologne Cathedral 17 
 
 Fragment from same 62 
 
 Group of figures from Winchester College Chapel 63 
 
 Arms of Cardinal Beaufort, from the Refectory, St. Cross .. to face 68 
 
 Figure of Glass-painter, from Winchester College Chapel 70 
 
 Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 76 
 
 Medallion from Lincoln Cathedral, Legend of St. Gregory .. to face 77 
 
 Part of a Jesse, from Llanrhaidr Church to face 86 
 
 Head from Bristol Cathedral 105 
 
 Patterns from Salisbury Cathedral to face 109 
 
 Patterns from same to face 116 
 
 Pattern from Chartham, and a German pattern to face 118 
 
 Geometrical patterns from Salisbury to face 121 
 
 Arms, Edward L, from St. Alban's Abbey 129 
 
 Arms, John of Gaunt, from the same 159 
 
 Arms of France, from Froyle Church, and Arms of Berkeley, from 
 
 Bristol Cathedral to face 165 
 
 Fragment from Cologne Cathedral .. 174 
 
 Patterns from Merton College, and from Lincoln Cathedral . . to face 175 
 
 Shield, Lion rampant, from St. Alban's Abbey 185 
 
 The Last Supper, from German glass in the collection of the late 
 
 Lord Herbert of Lea to face 190 
 
 Head from Bristol Cathedral 214 
 
 Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 221 
 
 Diagram of North Rose window, Lincoln Cathedral 223 
 
 Figures from Nettlestead, Kent ; Barnwell, Northamptonshire ; and Bush- 
 bury, Staffordshire to face 231 
 
 St. Anne teaching the Virgin, from Stanford Church, 1335 . . to face 244 
 
 Arms, Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, from St. Alban's 255 
 
 Diagram of an Heraldic window, York Cathedral 259 
 
 Fragment from Cologne Cathedral 284 
 
 Diagram of East window, Gloucester Cathedral 288 
 
 Figure, part of a Knight, from Adderbury, Oxon 311 
 
 Arms, Lichfield Cathedral to face 312 
 
 Group, fragment from Lincoln Cathedral 325 
 
 Diagram of East window, Beauchamp Chapel, Warwick 328 
 
 Emblem of the Trinity, from Redcliffe Church 342 
 
 Ornamented circle, with I. H. S., from Thaxted Church, Essex, 1490 .. 362 
 
 The initial letters of the Memoirs are from New College Chapel, Oxford. (See 
 p. 133.) The Cologne fragments are from the collection of J. D. T. Niblet, Esq. 
 
ADDITIONS AND COEEECTIONS. 
 
 It should have been mentioned in the Biographical Memoir, that in 1849 Mr. 
 Winston published an ' Introduction to the Study of Painted Glass.' (J. H. 
 Parker, Oxford.) It is founded on the Memoir on the Painted Glass at 
 Lincoln, and includes the substance of a lecture given at Oxford in that year. 
 
 Page 55. Add as a note to Letter XXVII. 
 
 Mr. "Winston did not see the completed works. Since the remarks in this 
 letter Avere written, other windows have been added of equal merit as works of 
 art with those on which he comments. 
 
 Page 56. Add as a note to Letter XXVIII. 
 
 Mr. Winston's advice as to clearstory windows has been acted upon with 
 entire success. 
 
 Page 57. Add as a note to Letter XXIX. 
 
 Mr. Wilson had published short memoirs of the distinguished artists by 
 whom the windows were designed. 
 
 A circumstance recently mentioned by him proves the geneial interest which 
 such works as the Glasgow windows are capable of exciting. Observing that 
 many of the working-men came to the cathedral to look at them, he offered 
 to give a lecture on them. The number of applications for tickets of admission 
 was nearly 6000. 
 
 This fact seems to offer an encouragement for the completion of the similar 
 works at St. Paul's, and to justify a hope that they will be equally popular. 
 
 Page 125, line 22, and in the Index, for "Egington" read "Eginton." 
 Page 350, line 9, for " Nethereale," read " Nether Scale." 
 
hvWiJU.:ui, it:- 
 
GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 HE life of the author of the following Memoirs, of 
 whom some account may here be expected, offers 
 few of the materials which generally render bio- 
 graphy interesting or amusing. It was active and 
 useful, but not eventful, having been chiefly passed 
 in the steady exercise of a profession, in the cul- 
 tivation of some favourite branches of knowledo-e. 
 and in a liberal application of the fruits that were 
 reaped from them. He was not either by birth or accident placed 
 in any unusual position, or exposed to vicissitudes of fortune ; 
 he w^as unconnected with political parties and public events; 
 and happily quite free from the eccentricities and irregularity 
 w^hich sometimes cause amusement or regret by their contrast 
 wdth the talents wath which they are united. The outline, 
 therefore, of liis life may soon be traced ; and no attempt will 
 be made to fill it up with trifling anecdotes and circumstances 
 of common occurrence, neither conveying useful information 
 nor illustrating character. Connection with the art from whose 
 future history his name will never be separated is the only 
 circumstance which can attach any public interest to liis life ; 
 and therefore it is to matters arising from this connection that 
 the greatest portion of the following Memoir will be given. 
 
 Charles Winston was born at Lymington, in Hampshire, on 
 the 10th of March, 1814, and was the elder of the two sons of 
 the Rev. Benjamin Winston, and Helen, daughter of Sir Thomas 
 Reid, Baronet. Of his mother he was deprived in childhood ; 
 and the care of his early years devolved on his father's mother, 
 Mrs. Sandford. She was the only child of Charles Winston, 
 formerly Attorney-General of Dominica; and it was in com- 
 pliance with a condition in his will that her son, under a private 
 Act of Parliament, took the name of Winston instead of Sandford. 
 
^ BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 He held the living of Farningham, Kent, upwards of tliirty 
 years, but resigned it in January, 1848. 
 
 In the vicarage-house of this parish the boyhood and early 
 youth of Charles Winston were passed. Here he was educated 
 by his father till the age of fourteen or fifteen ; and when 
 at that age he became one of the pupils of the Kev. Weeden 
 Butler, who then resided at Farningham, he still continued to 
 live at the vicarage. This home education probably was an 
 advantage to him, and may have contributed towards the forma- 
 tion of his future character in its best features ; for it was a 
 home under whose unperceived influence, independently of any 
 direct precepts, his good principles and generous and honourable 
 sentiments, free from the least taint of affectation and display, 
 might have been imbibed, and where a spirit of intelligent 
 curiosity would have been awakened and encouraged in a mind 
 naturally active and thoughtful. 
 
 On the completion of his education the law was, after a short 
 interval of uncertainty, fixed upon for his profession. He was 
 accordingly entered at the Inner Temple, and became a pupil 
 of Mr. Warren, now a Master in Lunacy, and afterwards, for a 
 short time, of Mr. Twopenny. 
 
 He commenced the practice of the law as a special pleader ; 
 and in this severe discipline lie most probably acquired or 
 strengthened his habits of minute accuracy and patient industry. 
 
 In 1845 he was called to the bar, and became a member of 
 the Home Circuit. But his business continued to be still chiefly 
 confined to his chambers ; he did not very frequently appear in 
 court as a barrister, and but seldom went on the circuit ; and 
 never perhaps the entire circuit. He was much engaged in 
 arbitrations, and in drawing specifications of patents ; and in 
 the latter a fertility in mechanical contrivance, and an early 
 fondness for and quickness in understanding machinery, were 
 frequently of use to himself, and sometimes to his clients ; for 
 he is said occasionally to have suggested improvements and to 
 have corrected errors in the patents for which he was preparing 
 the specifications. 
 
 During many years also he was in the habit of acting as a 
 deputy -judge in some of the county-courts ; and on the whole 
 his business was a considerable one, although, as is not unfre- 
 quent in the law, his reputation might not extend beyond the 
 limits of the profession. It was through his other pursuits that 
 his name became more generally known. 
 
 In the practice of the law he continued till the year 1864. 
 
EARLY PURSUITS. 3 
 
 In the month of May in that year he married ^laria, youngest 
 daughter of the late Philip Eaoul Lempriere, of Eozel ^Vlanor, 
 Jersey, a family with which he was already connected by the 
 marriage of his mother's sister with a younger brother of 3Ir. 
 Lempriere. On this marriage he withdrew from his profession. 
 
 Mr. Winston's residence in London — first as a student, and 
 afterwards as a practitioner of the law — gave him an oppor- 
 tunity of becoming acquainted with several who, either profes- 
 sionally or by choice, were occupied with some of the branches 
 of art and antiquities, for which he had already formed a taste. 
 
 He was among the earliest members of the Archaeological 
 Institute ; and indeed had been one of a small private society, 
 with some of whose members the establishment of the Institute 
 originated. An article by him on painted glass accordingly 
 appeared in the first number of their journal : and this was his 
 fii-st published essay. The following pages will sufficiently show 
 that he continued to be a frequent contributor to it, and to take 
 an active part in the proceedings of the society. 
 
 Though fond of every branch of the fine arts, and of the anti- 
 quities connected with them, glass-painting was his chief favourite, 
 and the special object of his study. This had engaged his 
 attention while yet a boy ; and in the catalogue of his drawings, 
 printed in the present volume, one may be seen with as early a 
 date as December, 1830. It was perhaps in the early part of 
 that year that he began the study of the art. 
 
 Though it is generally impossible to fix on the circumstance 
 by which the mind is directed to a particular pursuit, and a 
 predominant taste acquired, an attempt is often made to assign 
 one whenever eminence has been attained. Thus a recent notice 
 of Mr. ^Yinston and his works atttributes his taste for glass- 
 painting to the influence of the painted windows at Oxford. 
 The cause assigned is a plausible one ; but in the present case 
 there was no opportunity for its operation. If a cause is to be 
 sought, it is more likely to be found in circumstances connected 
 with some repau'S and improvements in the church at Farning- 
 ham, in the course of which a little old painted glass came into 
 his father's possession, and an acquaintance was made with the 
 late Mr. Miller, an eminent glass-painter of that time. Con- 
 versation and discussions arising out of these matters would 
 hardly fail to interest an intelligent boy ; and they might give 
 a particular determination to his natural sensibility to beauty of 
 form and colour : nor is it improbable that they might also con- 
 tribute to encourage his taste for architecture. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 The assiduity with which, from the early date above noticed, 
 Mr. Winston made drawings of ancient glass-paintings is appa- 
 rent from the list of them ; and the fidelity and spirit with 
 which he reproduced as well the colours as the designs of the 
 originals are extraordinary. To borrow some remarks from a 
 notice appended to the last of the following Memoirs : " his 
 drawings of glass-paintings are unequalled. In character and 
 expression, force, truth, purity, and brilliance of colour, as well 
 as in the representation of the texture of the glass, they are 
 unparalleled. They are, in fact, as perfect facsimiles of the 
 original as can be produced by water-colour upon paper." 
 
 In 1847 he published his 'Inquiry into the difference of 
 Style observable in ancient Glass-paintings, especially in Eng- 
 land, with Hints on Glass-painting.' The origin of this book 
 is stated in the ]3reface to it. As long ago as 1838 he had 
 drawn up and circulated among his friends, in manuscript, a 
 brief treatise, in which he had reduced the different styles of 
 glass-painting to classes, in imitation of Kickman's ' Gothic Archi- 
 tecture,' arranging them in corresponding periods. This sketch 
 was the foundation of the larger work which he was encouraged 
 to undertake by Mr. Parker, of Oxford, who published it. But 
 the original slight outline had to be carefully and minutely filled 
 up ; and to collect new materials, to arrange the mass pre- 
 viously accumulated, to examine many questions which from 
 time to time arose, and to prepare drawings for the plates, 
 formed a work of much labour, in which he had no assistance 
 from English or from foreign treatises, though he has referred 
 to two or three of the latter for corroboration or illustration. 
 The work was quite original, and completed without neglect of 
 his profession. For it would be a mistake to suppose that, either 
 then or in subsequent years, he neglected the law for its more 
 attractive rival. An instance of the diligence with which he 
 would at the same time apply to both occurs in a letter of twelve 
 closely-written sides of note-paper to his friend Mr. Wilson, 
 consisting of minute observations relating to the windows of Glas- 
 gow Cathedral, of which more will be said hereafter. "Only 
 fancy," says the letter, "since the 24th of September " (the date of 
 it being the 26th of October) " I have disposed of foui' thousand 
 cases and thirty insolvencies in the courts here. Hard work, I 
 assure you." Another letter, on the same circuit, and relating to 
 the same subject, is written "just before going into court." 
 
 On these circuits the opportunity of examining glass-paintings 
 was never omitted. In a letter written while holding courts at 
 
THE 'INQUIRY.' 5 
 
 Shrewsbury, he says, " I have seen more than the usual quantity 
 of modern glass during my late peregrinations in England and 
 Wales ; and certainly, if anything, the art has lowered during 
 the last year." In fact, glass-painting never escaped his atten- 
 tion. On a tour in Germany, for instance, a piece of ancient 
 painted glass was observed in the windows of an inn where the 
 horses were baiting. It was carefully examined, a note made, 
 and mention of it, as an example of some peculiarity, is intro- 
 duced into the book we are now speaking of. 
 
 This book, which has been long out of print, and therefore 
 may be here a little more particularly noticed, consists, as tlie 
 title indicates, of two parts — the first containing a brief history 
 of glass-painting, a description of its different methods, and a 
 very minute examination and arrangement of its styles; the 
 second offers some critical observations on its modern state, on 
 its peculiarities as a branch of painting, on the principles accord- 
 ing to which it ought to be exercised, and on the causes w^hich 
 have been opposed to its successful cultivation since the modern 
 revival of it. There is also an appendix containing a translation of 
 that portion of the ' Diversarum Artium Schedula ' of Theophilus 
 which relates to glass-painting ; and both in this appendix, and in 
 the notes, much miscellaneous, interesting, and instructive matter 
 is introduced. The second volume of it consisted of plates. 
 
 The styles are divided, according to Eickman's nomenclature, 
 into the Early English, the Decorated, and the Perpendicular ; 
 but with the addition of the Cinquecento — the most perfect 
 style ; glass-painting not having declined contemporaneously 
 with Gothic architecture, but having attained its highest degree 
 of excellence w^hen the latter was considerably debased. The 
 Cinquecento style existed for thirty years contemporaneously 
 with the Perpendicular. 
 
 All these styles are frequently mentioned, and more or less 
 particularly described, in the following Memoirs ; but their cha- 
 racteristic featm-es are delineated ^vith much more minuteness 
 in the Inquiry ; and they are also there illustrated with nume- 
 rous plates. 
 
 To the style of glass-painting between the Cinquecento 
 period and the recent revival, the name of the Intermediate 
 style was given in tlie hope that the present age might develop 
 a new and improved style. 
 
 For the formation of such a style, the total relinquishment 
 of all copies and imitations of ancient glass whatever is advo- 
 cated. " It is evident," he observes, " that the first step towards 
 
6 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 elevating glass-painting to the rank it once held among the arts, 
 is to estimate its productions by those sound rules of criticism 
 which are alike applicable to all works of art, and not by the 
 sole standard of antiquarian conformity. But I fear that this 
 principle cannot be carried into effect whilst glass-painting is 
 confined to mere imitation. In estimating the merit of an imi- 
 tative art, two points are really presented for consideration — its 
 quality as a work of art, and its conformity with the conven- 
 tionalities of style. But inasmuch as a knowledge of the con- 
 ventionalities of style is more commonly possessed than a know- 
 ledge of the principles of art, because the former is incomparably 
 easiei' of acquirement than the latter, amateurs, ^vho exert a 
 very powerful influence on the state and condition of glass- 
 painting, are apt in their criticisms to fall into the error of re- 
 garding a conformity with style, not as an accessory to the glass- 
 painting, but as constituting the sole end and essential object of 
 the work. Hence a copy or a mere compilation, scarcely rising 
 in merit above a copy of some ancient glass or other painting, 
 is so often preferred to a design which attempts, however artis- 
 tically, to carry out an ancient style in spirit rather than in 
 conventionality only, because the mere copy will naturally exhibit 
 a closer and more literal compliance with the petty details of 
 style than the latter more intrinsically meritorious work — a 
 course which cannot fail to retard materially the real advance- 
 ment of glass-painting as an art, and the full development of its 
 powers." ^ He then proceeds to detail the methods by which, 
 whilst glass-painting may be improved as an art, it may be har- 
 monized with the architecture of Norman, Early English, and 
 Decorated buildings. 
 
 The views in this chapter of his book he retained with little 
 or no alteration. In a letter to Mr. Wilson, of the 25tli of 
 March, 1857, he observes : " As to what you say of striking out 
 a new style of treatment, it is precisely what I meant when I 
 wrote that book, * An Inquiry into the difference of Style in 
 Glass-painting.' I had not looked at it for years till last night, 
 when I read through the chapter beginning at p. 268. I was 
 surprised to find how little of it I should wish altered were it 
 now to be re-written : and I am pleased at this, and to observe 
 that you, though working from a different point, have tended so 
 nearly to the same conclusion. I wish you would just run your 
 eye over it. It is very short." 
 
 1 P. 283. 
 
HOW GLASS-PAINTING SHOULD BE TREATED. 7 
 
 The leading doctrines which he has always steadily main- 
 tained are — that glass-painting should be treated as a branch 
 of the art of painting, distinguished only by the peculiarities 
 arising from the nature of the materials ; that within the limits 
 imposed by these peculiarities, representation should be cha- 
 racterized by the highest perfection of art in design, colour, and 
 expression, and not made in the rude and imperfect manner 
 prevalent during its earlier periods, which, in fact, was the 
 result of ignorance, not of intention ; that the distinguishing 
 excellences of a glass-painting — brilliancy and transparency — 
 should be carefully preserved ; that designs for a glass-painting 
 should always be made and coloured with reference to the 
 quality of the glass to be used ; and that consequently an artist 
 who makes designs for glass-painting should have not only a 
 knowledge of this particular branch of painting, but also a prac- 
 tical acquaintance with the qualities of different kinds of glass. 
 Finally, he repeatedly urges that glass-painting should be treated 
 simply as an art, free from the restraints of antiquarianism, and 
 guided by a taste unwarped by ecclesiastical prejudices and 
 religious associations. 
 
 On one point, very slightly indeed indicated in the present 
 book, but occasionally alluded to in some of the following 
 memoirs and letters, he appears to have altered a long-cherished 
 opinion ; but the change does not involve any inconsistency with 
 his leading doctrines ; and it is, in truth, nothing more than an 
 alteration of opinion as to the possibility of designing the figure 
 portions of painted windows so as to harmonize with the style of 
 early buildings without offending the refinement of modern taste. ^ 
 
 He had long entertained an idea, founded on the striking- 
 similarity of treatment in drapery which is observable between 
 archaic Greek and very early Christian art, and is frequently 
 pointed out in the following memoirs and letters, that the latter 
 might be improved by a judicious study of the former, which is 
 so much more graceful in its lines, and in the general com- 
 position. 
 
 On this ground he based his proposal to improve designs for 
 
 ^ The following remarks on Mr. opportunities of knowing how much 
 
 Winston's change of opinion, the nature Mr. Winston was in the habit of dis- 
 
 and extent of which have been some- cussing with him both glass-painting 
 
 what misunderstood, have been com- and other branches of art, and how 
 
 municated by his friend Mr. Charles much he relied upon his judgment. 
 
 Heath Wilson, of Glasgow, whose name This is, indeed, sufficiently shown by 
 
 has already occurred. Though a stranger the annexed correspondence, 
 to Mr. Wilson, the editor had many 
 
8 BIOGKAPHICAL MEMOIK. 
 
 glass-painting in the Early English style by the study and imi- 
 tation of archaic Greek works ; and, as a natural sequence, while 
 he advocated this improvement in drapery, he pointed out that 
 the human form might be in like manner improved from the 
 same source. It was in conformity with these views that the 
 windows in the round part of the Temple Church were executed ; 
 but by a letter to Mr. Wilson, — the last in the annexed corre- 
 spondence, — this idea appears to have been abandoned, together 
 with that of any other modification of mediaeval art. In this 
 letter it is said : " In designing windows for mediaeval churches, 
 there are but two courses — either to adopt modern art (which 
 is the best course where figures are introduced), or to adopt 
 mediaeval art. There is no middle course, as I once supposed 
 and advocated, of getting a modification of mediaeval art by 
 good artists : you have entirely convinced me of my error. The 
 Glasgow windows, and also the Alnwick window, by Dyce, are 
 sufficient proof that I was wrong, and that you were right." 
 
 At the commencement of his career as a critic Mr. Winston 
 took high ground for glass-painting, and insisted upon the im- 
 portance of constituting this art a branch of the fine arts, and of 
 avoiding all mere literal imitations of old forms; he insisted 
 upon the necessity of introducing correct forms and natural 
 expression, and of designing the figure parts of windows as well 
 as the existing state of fine art will admit of. But he never lost 
 sight of the conditions of glass-painting. These he thoroughly 
 understood, but he thought their observance consistent with 
 good art. 
 
 He could not for some time emancipate himself entirely from 
 some prevalent ideas of archaeological consistency, which have in 
 reality fettered glass-painting and prevented its advancement as 
 an art ; but, having insisted upon its capability of higher things, 
 he for some time thought it possible to combine the two objects 
 — that which he so ardently wished to see realized, and that 
 which so many held to be of equal importance. Hence his 
 earnest search among the monuments of past ages for examples 
 which might illustrate his meaning, and his recommendation of 
 those archaic forms of Greek art which combine so much that is 
 beautiful with a resemblance to peculiarities of style or treat- 
 ment in early glass-painting. 
 
 His opinions upon this subject were supported by the obvious 
 influence of Greek upon Byzantine forms of ornament, a result 
 probably of their imitation, in a rude and imperfect manner, of 
 the Greek remains by which the artists were surrounded. A 
 
MATEKIAL FOR GLASS-PAINTING. 9 
 
 better and more accurate study of these remains, of which we 
 possess so many fine examples, by artists of higher cultivation, 
 might, he thought, develop an art in the same direction which 
 then would harmonize with ancient edifices, and yet be excellent 
 in form. An unceasing study of art, however, which occupied 
 every leisure hour, modified these ideas, and they were finally 
 abandoned ; but he adhered to his early proposition that glass- 
 painting should be a fine art ; feeling the general truth that the 
 more perfect its forms, the more truly it harmonizes with 
 the perfection of ancient forms of architecture, although it might 
 not harmonize in the letter with the imperfect paintings of the 
 same age. 
 
 The success of a glass-painting depending as much on the 
 quality of the material employed as on the skill of the artist, 
 improvement in the modern manufacture of coloured glass was 
 not less an object of Mr. Winston's attention than the establish- 
 ment of correct principles and the elevation of the art to 
 a higher standard of excellence. He therefore applied himself 
 to the examination and comparison of specimens of old glass, 
 from even the earliest times, to chemical analyses, and to making 
 some experimental manufacture according to the results which 
 were obtained from these and the ancient receipts preserved in 
 the treatise of * Theophilus.' These investigations were attended 
 with much success ; but it will be more interesting to give an 
 account of them and their result in his own words from two 
 letters written to Mr. Wilson in 1856. 
 
 The extracts from these letters will also furnish a specimen of 
 his characteristic energy ; and they will at the same time, unfor- 
 tunately, show the vexation which his sensitive nature experienced 
 at the obstacles thrown in his way by indifference or self-interest, 
 and at the more surprising want of support from those who with 
 more carefulness had it in their power to effectually improve 
 the art which, in point of expenditure, they were so liberally 
 encouraging. 
 
 " Ever since 1850," says the first of the letters just mentioned, 
 "I have been amusing myself, at no small cost, in having 
 analyses made of ancient glass, that of the twelfth and thirteenth 
 centuries in particular, and have entirely succeeded in discovering 
 its manufacture, thus clearing up many points which before 
 were only matters of conjecture. I gave the analyses to — — , 
 who has the glass-works close to this place, and with my scientific 
 friends assisted him in reproducing the ancient material, which 
 he has done most successfully, and I have had two windows 
 
10 BIOGEAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 done in the Temple Church (the round part) to commemorate 
 
 onr triumph. Whether will go on making the glass 
 
 when not working under my eye, is another question ; but the 
 problem is solved, and this is most interesting to me as an anti- 
 quary, and ought to be so to the artist, for there can be no 
 mistake about the effect of the new material, which is as harmo- 
 nious in colour, brilliant, and at the same time solid in appear- 
 ance, as the old glass is. By these means, therefore, a great, and, 
 as I thought at one time, insuperable obstacle to making designs 
 after the remains of the twelfth and thirteenth century glazing, 
 has been entirely overcome, and I only wish you were in these 
 chambers at this moment, in order that I might compare with 
 you the results of our researches with the genuine old specimens. 
 We have beat the French glass-makers so hollow that it is quite 
 laughable, and one of their chief glass-paiaters has actually 
 
 ordered some glass of , an incontestable proof of English 
 
 superiority. I am not surprised, for, in the first place, I went 
 to better chemists than those employed in these matters in 
 France ; and, when we came to work the matter synthetically, I 
 had the good fortune to obtain the service of a first-rate chemist, 
 who took up the matter as an amateur, like myself, without 
 which, considering the enormous difficulties which a totally dif- 
 ferent existing form of furnace and different fuel from that 
 formerly in use presented, we never could have turned our 
 analyses to any practical use. You see, therefore, I have not 
 been idle ; but I have had to work entirely by myself, exposed to 
 all the attacks and sneers which I have provoked by holding an 
 independent course, and not allying myself to the 'friends of the 
 
 movement,' Mr. and his friends who write in the . 
 
 Had I been a Puseyite I dare say I should have been lauded to 
 the skies — so much for party spirit ; which, however, I can well 
 afford to laugh at." 
 
 In the second letter, of the 20th April, 1856, Mr. Winston 
 writes : — 
 
 " It was in the hope of procuring a good material on which 
 to work, that in 1850 I employed a first-rate professional chemist 
 to analyze some old twelfth-century glass, and I subsequently 
 got a pupil of the same man to analyse many other specimens. 
 I offered to Chance of Birmingham the analyzes if he would 
 attempt to work them out, but he refused; and ultimately 
 
 , of , offered to take the matter up, and he erected 
 
 a furnace for the purpose. It was fortunate that did 
 
 offer, for without his aid there could have been no practical 
 
MATERIAL FOE GLASS-PAINTING. 11 
 
 result; and had his place been further from the Temple, I 
 could not have attended to the experiments as much as I did, 
 nor could I have got my chemical friend to do so ; and if we 
 
 had not attended, 's people must have utterly failed to do 
 
 anything. For the operation was a regular chemical one from 
 beginning to end, requiring pure chemical knowledge, and a 
 great deal of it too, to carry it out ; and a branch of chemistry, 
 by the bye, on which comparatively little is known. I am con- 
 fident that the labours of the last six years have made my 
 chemical frieuds better acquainted with the subject than any 
 other chemists. Indeed, we have actually produced glass at 
 
 's which a good chemist told me (not knowing that we 
 
 had succeeded in making it) was impossible to be made. The 
 only colours we have hitherto tried our hands at are blue, the 
 streaky ruby, several but not all kinds of green, yellow, white, 
 and a few shades of purple ; which no one else has succeeded in 
 producing. Vse have been trying only for twelfth-century 
 colours as yet, and of these we have not yet attacked the 
 whole ; but Avhat we have done, we have done thoroughly. The 
 discom-aging part of it is, that I must attend to it myself, if I 
 want the glass for any work in which I am interested. Many 
 glass-painters do not know good glass from bad. Indeed, some 
 
 of them actually encourage to make a sort of glass in 
 
 some sort resembling the real thing, which glass has been 
 imitated by others ; so that I expect (as it is much easier to be 
 made in a short time) the real manufacture will be given up, 
 except when particularly asked for. I may say that this result 
 has already taken place. When therefore you hear of Winston's 
 glass you must bear in mind that there are two sorts— the right 
 sort, including nearly the whole of the twelfth and thirteenth 
 century colours, and some of the colours of the sixteenth cen- 
 tury ; and the wrong sort. My friends and myself are content 
 to be judged by what has been done under our own eye ; but 
 
 we do not stand godfathers to all that makes to please his 
 
 customers. We have worked out the problem, and shown 
 people that the old glass can be reproduced ; but if they object 
 to the price, and are content with an imitation, they are only 
 
 fit to be left to shift for themselves. Mr. and myself 
 
 were requested by the Dean and Chapter of Norwich to super- 
 intend a large window which was done for their cathedral. 
 
 We had no check on the artist, nor on ; the consequence 
 
 was that the trouble we had to keep matters straight — for 
 the Dean and Chapter had stipulated for the new glass — was 
 
12 BIOGEAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 so great that we both were sick of it before the work was 
 completed. 
 
 " Afterwards the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln begged me to 
 superintend eight windows, now in progress, for their cathedral. 
 I consented on one condition, that their contract with the glass- 
 painter contained a stipulation that it should be executed with 
 glass to be approved of by me. The result of this is, that, 
 though six months at least have elapsed, the whole of the glass 
 is not yet made. I declare to you that the bother I have had 
 about this I will never undergo again. If our glass-painters 
 would but back me up, there would be no difficulty; but you 
 may suppose what the taste is, when I am doing all I can to 
 have the glass made one way, and 's general customers doing- 
 all they can to have it made another way. I mention all this 
 merely to show the lamentable state of glass-painting." ^ 
 
 Mr. Winston was naturally vexed that glass was not made 
 according to his directions ; but no blame can be imputed to 
 the manufacturers for preferring their own methods. They are 
 gentlemen of known skill ; and Mr. Winston did not prefer any 
 coloured glass to theirs. As, however, he anxiously disclaimed 
 responsibility for all glass not made according to his own views, 
 it is but just to him to relate the circumstances as they occurred ; 
 nor is it unjust to the glass-makers. If the glass now usually 
 made by them is as good as, or better than, that made according 
 to his wish — facts not here disputed — the credit will belong to 
 them solely. Should the other kind be wished for on any occa- 
 sion, they are the only persons who can supply it. And it must 
 be distinctly understood that the preceding extract from Mr. 
 Winston's letter is given simply as a narrative of what took 
 place in the progress of some interesting discoveries in the 
 manufacture of coloured glass, and of circumstances connected 
 with them, as they existed seven or eight years ago. It con- 
 tains no criticism on glass made subsequently to the period 
 of its date ; and it is obvious that all comment, either by way of 
 praise or blame, on the past or present productions of the glass- 
 makers is quite foreign to the present Memoir. 
 
 Notwithstanding the neglect, and even the direct opposition 
 and ridicule, with which the attempts to improve the manufac- 
 
 1 Some account of this new glass may is attributed to Mr. (now Dr.) Medlock, 
 
 be seen in one of the following memoirs, of the Eoyal College of Chemistry, and 
 
 entitled, ' On a revived Manufacture of to the practical skill of Mr, Edward 
 
 Coloured Glass used in ancient Win- Green, of Messrs. Powell's glass-works in 
 
 dows,' where the merit of the discovery Whitefriars. 
 
CATHEDRAL WINDOWS. 13 
 
 ture of coloured glass at first had to contend, tlie merit of the 
 discovery has been at length acknowledged. ]\Ir. Apsley Pellatt, 
 a very competent judge of their value, considers " that the 
 colours of the glass in the Temple windows are equal to the old ; 
 and that a debt of national gratitude is due to Mr. Winston for 
 liis long persevering and successful efforts to revive the rich 
 colours and low tone of ancient glass.^ Some churches where it 
 has been used will be mentioned in another place.^ 
 
 This long and minute study of glass-painting, in all its bear- 
 ings, was well known to most wdio take an interest in the art, 
 and hence Mr. AVinston was frequently consulted on intended 
 works. To applications of this kind lie seldom or never failed 
 to give liis cheerful and active assistance ; nor is the zeal with 
 which he used to exert himself to be ascribed merely to a love 
 of the subject. To enter warmly into any cause in which he 
 engaged, and to give a careful and conscientious examination of 
 every matter submitted to his 023inion, was a marked feature 
 of his character, as many of his friends who may have had occa 
 sion for his aid and advice in their private affairs must have 
 experienced. 
 
 The part he took in the painted windows of Korwich and 
 Lincoln Cathedrals has already been noticed in the account of his 
 experiments on the manufacture of coloured glass ; but the most 
 important work on which he was consulted was that arising from 
 the restoration of Glasgow Cathedival. In this he was deeply 
 interested for some years ; and as there is extant an extensive 
 correspondence relating to it with Mr. Wilson, the latter was 
 applied to for information. 
 
 A letter which Mr. Wilson wrote in reply is here inserted, 
 with very trifling omissions, as it will give a much more lively 
 idea of Mr. Winston's zeal and activity, and of the influence he 
 exercised over the execution of this undertaking, than any gene- 
 ral statements could afford : it will also explain some passages 
 in the annexed correspondence. 
 
 To some readers, moreover, evei-jiihing connected with this 
 great work — the greatest of the kind which has been executed 
 
 1 ' Genei'al View of Glass-painting, by quality of glass. Improvements in the 
 Mr, Apsley Pellatt, in connection with colouiing and manufactui-e of glass 
 the Jury's Keport on Stained Glass, and arising from them were communicated 
 Glass used for Decoration.' In the to Herr Ainmliller while the Glasgow 
 ' Builder ' of October 11, 1862, p. 735. windows were in progress. The letters 
 
 2 See a note to 7th memoir, to him will probably be made public. 
 The experiments above noticed re- Mr. Winston was also in correspondence 
 
 lated to both the colours and texture or with a French amateur on the subject. 
 
14 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 in modern times in these kingdoms, and which has already ex- 
 ercised a decided influence on a kindred work now in progress — 
 may not be uninteresting ; it is therefore hoped that the some- 
 what disproportionate space which is given to these windows in 
 the present Memoir will be excused. 
 
 Mr. Wilson's letter is dated the 15th of December, 1864, and 
 is addressed to his friend Mr. Penrose. 
 
 After mentioning the circumstances in which the plan for 
 filling the windows with painted glass originated, the first step 
 towards effecting it, and his application to various persons dis- 
 tinguished in science and art for advice, Mr. Wilson proceeds : — 
 
 " I wrote also to Mr. Winston, recalling myself to him as an 
 old acquaintance. His reply to that letter is the first of the 
 series which I send to you. 
 
 " It is necessary to the comprehension of our relationship that 
 I should state to you that my acquaintance at that time with the 
 subject of painted glass was but general, limited to a knowledge 
 of a few foreign works regarding it, and to the windows of some 
 continental cathedrals and churches, upon which I had at 
 different times made some notes. 
 
 " I had earnestly adopted the ideas of those who maintained, 
 like our friend Mr. Winston, that the windows ought to be works 
 of art in a high sense. 
 
 " Such was the state of matters when my late friend responded 
 to my request, and permitted me to sit at his feet, and to share 
 in the rich stores Avhich he had accumulated. He saw the im- 
 portance of the undertaking, and expressed his approbation of 
 the general plan which I had submitted for consideration, and 
 entered upon the subject with all the zeal and warmth of his 
 nature. 
 
 " Our correspondence on every subject connected with glass- 
 painting and the proposed windows commenced, and was carried 
 on, at the rate of about three letters a week for years. 
 
 " Aided by his advice, I visited the most important works of 
 glass-painting in England and in France. Never had pupil such 
 a master as mine. He gave me at times daily lessons ; advised 
 me what to see, and where to see it; sent me introductions 
 to several men learned in our subject, and communications of 
 the opinions of others whose opinions were of value. He revised 
 my specifications for the artists ; added to them, especially upon 
 technical points ; and although in his letters upon the subject he 
 says that he had but little to alter, I feel that they would not 
 have been so complete or valuable without his care and advice. 
 
 *'He visited Glasgow upon several occasions, and met our 
 
GLASGOW CATHEDRAL. 15 
 
 committee, offering them, I need not say, invaluable advice, and 
 encouraging tliem in the com-se which they had adopted ; he also 
 delivered a public lecture in Glasgow, which, though calculated 
 for a different class of hearers, and therefore not so well under- 
 stood as it deserved, aided in confirming the growing belief that 
 the windows ought to be works of fine art. 
 
 " Throughout the whole of our undertaking ]Mr. Winston 
 advised us upon every subject connected with the technical 
 execution of the windows ; and in my correspondence with the 
 Inspector of the Koyal Glass-painting establishment at Munich 
 I acted by his advice in all points relating to the subject. 
 
 " When our first window arrived he came to see it — a window 
 which, as we had desired, proved to be free of certain charac- 
 teristic defects in the execution of other works in Germany — a 
 fine mosaic, skilfully and tastefully carried out in all its parts, 
 but in some defective in power of colour, and exhibiting in the 
 ornamental portions certain German mannerisms, which we 
 anxiously desired should not be repeated. Our representations 
 were received by the artists with the utmost courtesy. They 
 sometimes expressed sm-prise at the knowledge of detail mani- 
 fested in our communications. This we owed to Mr. W^inston's 
 lessons. 
 
 " The gi'eat improvement which was manifested in successive 
 windows shows the value of Winston's advice to us, communi- 
 cated by me to the artists. 
 
 " On the art-part of the subject we also exchanged ideas ; and 
 I may be permitted to say — judging by his own expressions — 
 that I was privileged to afford him some instruction in the prin- 
 ciples of monumental art, as applied to glass-painting ; and as a 
 consequence of that long and intimate correspondence he aban- 
 doned — not the general high principles which he had established 
 in his writings — but some of his proposed methods of carrying 
 out those principles. 
 
 " Our correspondence continued to witliin a few days of his 
 death. His letters were latterly principally occupied witli the 
 proposed windows at St. Paul's Cathedral, and with the advice 
 which he was giving the inspector at Munich upon the subject 
 of the manufacture of glass, so as to improve upon the too pel- 
 lucid material hitherto used by the .Munich school. There was 
 every prospect of success attending these labours when he so 
 suddenly died. 
 
 " From all that I have said you may estimate the invaluable 
 nature, as well as the extent, of the services which he rendered 
 
16 . BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 to us in Glasgow, and the beneficial influence which he brought 
 to bear upon our enterprise and upon the artists whom we em- 
 ployed." 
 
 Of the correspondence mentioned by Mr. Wilson in the pre- 
 ceding letter, a small portion will be found in the Appendix to 
 the present Memoir. The minute remarks and criticisms on 
 glass-painting will perhaps be instructive and interesting to 
 many ; and they may direct the attention of those who have the 
 direction of similar works to points important to their successful 
 execution. The letters too may occasionally, though rarely, 
 supply the want of correspondence on moi-e general topics, in 
 showing something of the opinions and manner of the writer. 
 
 Mr. Wilson has mentioned that the latter part of his corre- 
 spondence related principally to the proposed glass-paintings for 
 St. Paul's Cathedral. Mr. Winston had been nominated one of 
 the committee for the embellishment of this edifice, and naturally 
 gave his chief, though not an exclusive, attention to the intended 
 glass-paintings, entering into the subject with the same ardour 
 which he had manifested in the case of the Glasgow windows. 
 One of the latest acts of his life was to make a journey to 
 Brussels to meet Herr Ainmiiller, the director of the Munich 
 establishment, in order to confer with him on the proposed 
 windows, with the advantage of being able to refer to those of 
 the Cathedral of St. Gudule, for enforcing and explaining the 
 views of the Committee more fully than could be done by mere 
 verbal directions or by correspondence. 
 
 In the success of these windows of St. Paul's, so fine a field for 
 the application of his favourite Cinquecento style, he was deeply 
 interested ; but he was not to see the result of even the small 
 portion of the work actually in progress. In 1863 his health had 
 shown signs of being seriously undermined. The nature of the 
 disorder, originating most probably in too anxious and laborious 
 occupations, was obscure ; but one of the most dangerous symp- 
 toms in which it manifested itself was an afiection of the heart. 
 To this he became a victim, dying quite suddenly while alone in 
 his chambers in the Temple on the 3rd of October, 1864, during 
 a temporary visit to London from the neighbourhood where he 
 had been passing part of the summer. 
 
 Several public notices of this unlooked-for event showed the 
 esteem in which he was generally held. Two of them, paying a 
 tribute to his peculiar talents, and feelingly expressing a sorrow 
 widely partaken of for the loss of an amiable and accomplished 
 friend, are retained at the end of the concluding memoirs of this 
 
OBITCAEY NOTICES. 17 
 
 collection, as they originally appeared. They make it unneces- 
 sary to say more on this topic ; nor is it requisite to examine in 
 detail 3Ir. Winston's abilities and personal character, the more 
 prominent features of which are sufficiently apparent. The 
 former were certainly of a liigh order, and could not fail to attract 
 attention; but the latter might merit greater praise. 3Iany 
 have doubtless surpassed him in natural abilities, and many 
 more in extent and variety of knowledge ; far fewer in moral 
 worth. Few have passed a more blameless life, and few have 
 united more of the qualities which win confidence and affection, 
 and command respect. 
 
APPENDIX TO BIOGRiPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 LETTERS TO MR. C. H. WILSON 
 
 Respecting the Painted Windows for Glasgow Cathedral. 
 
 I. 
 
 My DE\R Sir, Temple, 21st March, 1856. 
 
 I am quite glad to renew our acquaintance after the lapse of 
 so many years, and I assure you your note was a source of great 
 gratification and encouragement to me, showing, as it does, that the 
 views of so practical a man as yourself entirely corroborate mine 
 as a mere amateur. I quite agree with you that we have still our 
 glass-painters to form. At this moment I can hardly name, with 
 the exception of Mr. Hedgeland (who has painted the west window 
 at Norwich), a single real artist who is also a glass-painter. 
 
 Mr. has designed several windows, some tolerably good ; and 
 
 Dyce made a capital design for the Duke of Northumberland, which, 
 however, was obliged to be sent to Munich for execution. Ward 
 stands supreme as a master of ornamental detail, and he has an 
 assistant who draws well, but not quite in the way you would 
 
 like. There are several other glass-painters, such as , , 
 
 , and one or two others whose names I at present forget, whose 
 
 artistic power does not accord with their really honest attempts at 
 improvement. 
 
 But the great mass, such as , , , -, &c., can 
 
 only be looked upon as mere tradesmen, at the best. They cannot 
 even copy correctly, but have set up a style of their own, which 
 resembles the old work only in its defects. If you could manage 
 to found a school of art in glass, you would indeed supply a desi- 
 deratum. You will have no competitors; for I am sure that one 
 good artist, fertile in invention, and having a competent know- 
 ledge of ancient precedents, such as will enable him to catch the 
 spirit, and not merely follow the letter of the ancient windows, 
 would sweep the board in this case. 
 
 [Here follows an account of the attempt to revive the manufacture 
 of the old coloured glass, p. 9 of the preceding Memoir.] 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSOX. 19 
 
 With regard to the style of glass-painting which I tliink should 
 be followed, I cannot do better than refer you to the printed essay 
 I enclose, which you can use as you like, for I have another copy. 
 Whether T am right in an artistic sense, I leave my betters to 
 judge, and I shall be glad to know your own opinion. That I am 
 right in an antiquarian sense, I have no doubt. All antiquaries are 
 agreed that the style of art of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries 
 had a Byzantine origin ; that it is derived immediately from the 
 Greek, and but mediately from the Eoman art. I have several 
 things here which would surprise you by their analogies. Putting 
 history out of the question, there can be no shutting one's eyes to 
 the language of existing monuments. The strongest resemblance 
 is between the archaic Greek and the Earty English. In the draperies 
 we constantly recognise the pipe fold, the figure showing its fonn 
 beneath the clothes, the folds originating in the limbs, not going 
 across them, as in the fourteenth-century work ; and then again in 
 the ornamental details, in the foliage, there is the Greek handling 
 as plain as can be. I tried the experiment, in the Temple Church, 
 of having several figures copied from Greek designs, and the orna- 
 ment borrowed quite as much from classical Greek work as from 
 that of the twelfth century, and you would be astonished how 
 completely both agree with the character of the architecture. Of 
 course the Temple "windows are but experiments, done by a young 
 draughtsman, so far as the figures are concerned. But it shows 
 what may be done, and what a scope there is for artists, even when 
 they adopt a medallion style of composition, which, I think, is the 
 only style favourable to a display of the richest colouring. How- 
 ever, all this is gone into at length in the enclosed paper. 
 
 I can only say, in conclusion, that I do not know which pleases 
 me the most, to find that you are taking up the subject, or that a 
 common pursuit has prevented the dissolution of our acquaintance. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. WiNSTOX. 
 
 II. 
 
 My deap. Sir, Temple, 4tli April, 1856. 
 
 Absence from town has prevented my replpng sooner to 
 your letter. I am sure you do not at all overrate the difficulty 
 of your position, for I know myself what uphill work it is to 
 endeavour to make brother amateurs exert themselves, and the 
 obloquy one is exposed to for simply speaking the truth, all which 
 you will feel in a greater degree from your position as a practical 
 man of art. However, I do not at all despair, if you persevere in 
 your task, and do not thro^v it up in disgust. 
 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL MBMOIE. App. 
 
 I will as soon as possible procure you some specimens of the new 
 
 glass, and some of the ordinary glass to compare with it. • has 
 
 been induced to make a spurious sort, and to sell it at a cheaper 
 rate than the real stuff, in spite of all my remonstrances, and he 
 is now reaping the natural result— seeing, that is, others imitate 
 his glass and sell their spurious productions in the same way as he 
 has sold his own. However, I mention this merely that you may 
 be prepared for those detractors who say that there is nothing in 
 the new manufacture. I do not think there is anything in the 
 
 spurious work either of or others ; but there can be no doubt 
 
 that the glass made from the receipts I have supplied him with is 
 really the same as the old, and he should endeavour to keep himself 
 up to the mark. 
 
 The full-sized drawings I possess of glass I should be sorrj^ to 
 send, partly for fear of accident, and partly because I find the 
 greatest difficulty in making people not accustomed to them under- 
 stand them. But I will send you a book containing a quantity of 
 small-sized drawings, and especially of entire windows, which I 
 have just now lent to a lady, as this, I fancy, will meet your wants 
 completely. At present there is no nineteenth-century style adapted 
 to a Gothic building of the twelfth or thirteenth; and such a style 
 can only be founded conjointly on the works of the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries, and the remains of antiquity. 
 
 Tou will see, in the Abbe Texier's work on the enamels of Limoges, 
 that I am supported by facts, as well as the opinions of antiquaries, 
 in ascribing a Byzantine origin- to twelfth and thirteenth century 
 art. It is clear that a Venetian colony settled at Limoges (I think, 
 speaking from memory, in the tenth century), and we know that 
 St. Sophia at Constantinople served as the model of St. Mark's at 
 Venice. The connection between the Limoges people and the 
 Venetians, and between the Venetians and the Byzantines, being 
 made out, the question is, from what source did the latter derive 
 their art ? and an examination of their works pretty well shows that 
 it had its origin, partly in the old Eoman, partly in the most ancient 
 archaic Greek — the ancient air being ascribable rather to copying 
 from antiquity than to inherent rudeness.^ I want to see our own 
 work for twelfth or thirteenth century buildings conducted on 
 similar principles. I want no copying of the antique, no gods and 
 goddesses, not even the expression of entire repose which we see in 
 the old marbles; but I want to see the antique used as Eaphael 
 used it ; as a means of representing the true Christian sentiment, in 
 the most beautiful manner, and — because in the most beautiful — in 
 the most winning and popular manner. Christianity is not taught 
 
 1 See the Memoir on the resemblance the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, 
 between mediaeval and classical art as and the Lecture read before the Lichfield 
 exemplified in the glass-paintings of Working Man's Association. 
 
A pp. LETTERS TO MR. C. H. AVILSON. 21 
 
 by holding up asceticism, or anything else naturally repulsive, to 
 our admiration. Those who are the best Christians battle through 
 ordinary life as Christians, and these are most encouraged by the 
 example of persons of like passions and feelings, and exposed to 
 similar temptations, as themselves. The instincts of the pi-esent 
 age are opposed to descending to Gothic models, which at best, as in 
 Peter Fischer's shrine at Nuremberg, are coarse as compared vdth. 
 what modern art, improved by the study of the most perfect models, 
 Avould exact; and in the generality of instances they are below 
 mediocrity. 
 
 I think your selection of subjects very good, though no doubt 
 there will be great difference of opinion on that matter. The Dean 
 and Chapter of Lincoln, after much deliberation, the other day 
 adopted a design setting forth the scheme of human redemption, of 
 which I enclose a diagram. 1 have adopted a similar scheme, with 
 the advice of our late very learned chaplain, in the windows here, 
 and I think it interesting. 
 
 Very faithfully yours, 
 
 C. AViXSTON. 
 
 III. 
 
 My dear Sir, Temple, 20tli April, 1856. 
 
 I am sure I shall only be too glad to give any little assistance 
 in my power in maturing a work which will require the utmost 
 energy of yourself and friends to carry through properly, and will 
 demand a far greater expenditure of time and thought than the 
 world will credit ; and, therefore, if the provost will favour me with 
 a call here, I will show him whatever I have in the way of actual 
 glass, or drawings from glass. My book with drawings was returned 
 to me only yesterday, the friend to whom I had lent it having been 
 obliged to leave town through severe illness. I will send it j'ou 
 to-morrow by rail. There are some sketches of entire windows in 
 it, which I have found more useful than full-sized drawings of detail, 
 in explaining the thing to persons having no previous knowledge 
 of the matter, and in this respect you will find it of some little use. 
 As for the engravings in the monograph of the cathedral of Bourges, 
 or indeed the plates of any work, they entirely fail to give the effect 
 of the glass, which can only be produced by carefully coloured 
 drawings, and therefore they are to be considered merely as 
 diagi'ams. I mention this because a good many people who set up 
 as judges have derived their knowledge of the subject from prints, 
 and not from a sight of the original works. This accounts for such 
 persons looking with complacency on modern windows, which faith- 
 fully reproduce all the bad drawing and bad composition of the old 
 
22 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIK. App. 
 
 glass, without reproducing even in the slightest degree the coloar 
 and tone of the old glass, which constitute its redeeming feature. 
 
 [Here follows an account of the experiments made for reproducing 
 the ancient glass, inserted in the preceding Memoir, p. 9.] 
 
 With I'egard to your inquiiy about a designer, I think you will 
 find that with a little attention you would j^ourself design the glass 
 as well as, or better than, any living glass-painter. But then, 
 without a practical knowledge of the subject, you would be sure 
 to do things which, when the glass was up, would have the eifect 
 of making it quite different in appearance from what jgu. intended. 
 Thus, if you put a red streak and a green streak together, the 
 chances are that the colours would neutralise ; so, if the white was 
 not kept narrower than you would think necessary, it would spread 
 over the design. These and a variety of other matters are to be 
 learned only by experience, not only of the material generally, but 
 of the new material itself (if used as I think it ought to be), which 
 differs in an extraordinary degree from the ordinary material. 
 
 \\ hat I should advise is to employ a glass-painter who is really an 
 artist, and to exercise a considerable surveillance over him, Ihus 
 he would have the benefit of your artistic perception, and you would 
 have the advantage of his technical knowledge, and being an artist 
 he could embody your ideas. At present there is but one man 
 whom I can think of recommending, George Hedgeland, of Xo. 2, 
 
 Grove-place, St. John's Wood. Poor ■ — went out of his mind 
 
 just after he had made a sketch for the west window of Norwich. 
 After an immense deal of consicjeration the committee disregarded 
 
 W 's and my advice to send the window to Munich, and adopted 
 
 (as I thought as a pis aller) our recommendation of Hedgeland, then 
 an unknown man; but he has sent a piece of glass to the H3-de park 
 Exhibition, decidedly the best piece of English glass there. As it 
 happened, our recommendation turned out trumps, and I do not 
 hesitate to say that, as a piece of true glass- painting (I say nothing 
 about the design or the arrangement of the subjects, nor the choice, 
 all which things were decided by the committee themselves), this 
 west window of Norwich is the best window of modern times, 
 whether English or foreign, and the only English window, in point 
 of art, which will bear a comparison with the Munich windows — 
 I mean in point of drawing and artistic execution. This window 
 has been very much condemned * * * * 
 
 ********* 
 
 * * *. But everybody whose opinion I prize has given 
 
 the same praise to this great work. It has its defects, of course ; 
 but these are far surpassed by its excellences. When I wanted 
 some windows for the Temple Church — for which I caused the new 
 glass to be made — I put them into the hands of Ward, and, indeed, 
 I could not have done better at the time, for 1 knew that Hedgeland 
 
API'. LETTERS TO MR. C. H, WILSON. 23 
 
 knew notliing about the teclinicalities of the twelfth-century orna- 
 ment, and I wanted not to copy, but to have original designs, and 
 without Ward's aid I could not have had my thoughts expressed. 
 But the figures are not up to the mark. They were done by a 
 
 young artist, a pupil of N 's, but who has not had the experience 
 
 of Hedgeland, who is a regular artist. I therefore should not ven- 
 ture to recommend him to you. 
 
 Since the Temple windows were done, I delivered that lecture of 
 which I sent you a copy, which had such an effect on Hedgeland, 
 who saw at a glance what I meant by the connection between 
 twelfth and thirteenth century and Greek art, that he set himseK 
 to work to examine the twelfth and thirteenth century ornamenta- 
 tion ; and shortly after he was employed by the Dean and Chapter 
 of Lincoln to paint the eight windows I have already mentioned. 
 
 It is only necessary to see his designs to perceive the enormous 
 superiority of an artist over the herd of glass-wrights. His figures 
 are intelligible, and many of them beautiful — Greek in character, 
 but strictly in accordance with the ornament, which is first-rate 
 thirteenth- century work. I do not mean to say that these windows 
 are perfect models, but only that they are so enormously in advance 
 of everything else (my poor windows are beaten hollow), that I 
 should be most dishonest if I did not declare my conviction that 
 Hedgeland is your man 
 
 I have written you a long letter, but I thought I ought to let 
 you a little behind the scenes. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 IV. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, nth Feb. 1857. 
 
 The Baron dines here on Friday, and I only wish you could 
 meet him. I have been so busy that it was not until this evening 
 that I found time to read your notes hastily over. Certainly, I 
 ought to be satisfied, for never was there a more complete confirma- 
 tion of my advice that the subscribers should resort to continental 
 artists. I cannot tell you how much information I have derived 
 from your notes, and I wish to keep them a little longer ; it is so 
 satisfactory to have the opinion of another pair of eyes, not blinded 
 (as mine are from a continual habit of looking at glass exclusively) 
 to the inherent defects of all painted glass. Thus I should not have 
 noticed the commingling of the designs in the Norwich window, 
 simply because the old ones (the Gothic ones I mean) are as much 
 
24 BIOGEAPHICAL MEMOIR. An*. 
 
 commingled, and most of the Cinqnecento also, the Brussels glass and 
 one or two others from Belgium excepted. With regard to this 
 window, I ought to say that the choice of designs rested entirely 
 with the committee, and that Hedgeland thought that Albert Diirer's 
 designs would have suited better than Eaphael's, the figures being 
 slenderer, and the draperies more broken up. But my lords and 
 gentlemen thought otherwise. Such a window would not suit your 
 cathedral; had they attended to me, the landscapes would have 
 been fainter and more monotonous, that is to say, more grey, as in 
 Cinquecento work. I can quite understand what you say of the 
 shadows of that window, though this did not strike me before. The 
 shadows I know to be not a bit darker or more dense than those 
 at Brussels, but they appear darker because the high lights are 
 brighter, the glass at present being undulled by age. The shadows 
 at Lichfield are quite as deep ; but here again the high lights are 
 quite laid down by age. So also at King's ; some of the windows are 
 as deeply shaded quite as this, but the high lights are toned down 
 by age ; and it will be a question well worthy of consideration how 
 far in new glass it may not be well, either to make the shadows 
 lighter, or to dull the high lights. The dulling the high lights 
 artificially is a hazardous experiment, for age produces a broken 
 dulling, not a uniform dulling like art. And certainly the best 
 specimens of artificial dulling that I have seen, as at Munich, look 
 as if the glass had been ground. This is wholly destructive of the 
 brilliancy and sparlding character of glass. But it is possible that 
 some way may be devised of imparting the eff"ect of age to the glass, 
 though I doubt it. I am sure it would not do to shade figures as 
 little as Lusson does, except when they are very small ; then it does 
 not signify. It would be intolerable on a larger scale. The dry 
 hardness of the Alnwick glass is owing to the shadows not being 
 sufficiently stippled and juicy, or deep enough. Compare these with 
 the Brussels glass^ and you will see what I mean. If very light 
 shadows are right, then William of Wykeham's glass in the ante- 
 chapel of New College, Oxford, is superior to that of Brussels. 
 
 D , I know, was very full of keeping the glass in his window 
 
 flat, because the wall of the church was flat. But he was no logician, 
 otherwise he would have seen the confusion of ideas involved in his 
 proposition. This is well exposed by Dr. Johnson in the case of 
 
 dramatic writing. But it is possible that what D wrote to the 
 
 Germans had the effect of inducing them to alter their own style 
 for the worse. 
 
 I should give you a hint about D 's window. I dislike the 
 
 canopy work as much as you do, but I believe that he is perfectly 
 justified (having adopted the Italian Gothic) in mixing what you 
 justly call "Gothic" and Byzantine. This mixture is inherent in 
 the Italian Gothic, and constitutes one of the greatest objections to 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSOX. 25 
 
 the style, though, stmnge to say, Riiskin admires it. Therefore, be 
 
 on your guard, as otherwise you will give an advantage. 
 
 Also, be on your guard as to what you say of the date of the different 
 parts of Glasgow Cathedral. ***** 
 * ******* 
 
 ******** 
 
 Yours most truly, 
 
 C. WlXSTON. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, loth Feb. 1857. 
 
 The Baron dined here on Fnday, and I got Clarke to meet 
 him. The result was that the clock struck twelve when we thought 
 it was between nine and ten. We explained to him scientifically 
 everything that occurred to us, as to all the peculiarities of tone, 
 decomposition, &c., in glass of different dates and makes, and our 
 learned companion retaliated by giving us the clearest explanation 
 of art that T have ever had the good fortune to meet with. I fancy 
 the greater part of the time was consumed in discussion that had no 
 very immediate bearing on the matter in hand; but both Clarke 
 and I are perfectly channed with the Baron, who, however he may 
 stand as an artist — about which I dare say there is the usual 
 difference of opinion that occurs in .matters artistical — is certainly 
 gifted with an uncommon clear head and a most apt tongue. To be 
 
 sure what a difference between him and ! He takes much the 
 
 same view that I do of medallion windows, but says that to do them 
 properly, and with the groups properly studied, would be too costly ; 
 and his idea, as the safest, as well as that most within the compass 
 of the subscribers, is to fill all the windows with white patterns, 
 like those of the thirteenth century (of which you saw the approxi- 
 mate effect at Merton College, Oxford), placing shields of arms in 
 them, and a single angel at the top of each wrindow, after the 
 manner of Cimabue at xVssisi. The idea of the angels (which, 
 of courise, would be done in the highest art) was new to me ; but 
 I am convinced, as also was Clarke, who knows the cathedral well, 
 that the Baron is right ; and that in this simple manner the most 
 remarkable and satisfactory effect would be produced by my new 
 glass, at no gi'eater cost than the money already subscribed, without 
 darking the interior too much (which, I think, w-ould be fatal), and 
 wdth the certainty of success. I do not know what he means 
 to do wdth the experimental window, but he has borrowed a 
 number of drawings of me, so he seems determined to master the 
 .subject. 
 
26 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 I am off tomorrow to South Staffordsliire, to encounter some 
 
 rather harder work than my learned friend Mr. B has to 
 
 dispose of in his court. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 YI. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 8tb March, 1857. 
 
 T only returned a week ago 
 
 With regard to your note just received, I am as you are, my people 
 are your people, my horses are as your horses. I am clearly of 
 opinion that you must go abroad. I do not say this for the miserable 
 sake of appearing consistent, but from the conviction I have arrived 
 at from all the correspondence and aigument that has taken place 
 since I was at Glasgow, that, if you dabble with English glass- 
 painters, you will get into a sad scrape. So strongly do I feel 
 this, that I should of my own accord advise the matter to be put 
 wholly into the hands of some foreigner — the execution of the glass 
 as well as the making of the cartoons. But I will carefully consider 
 the contents of your note, and write to you again on Monday. I 
 am so busy just now, that I could not give it the attention which 
 it demands. 
 
 I sent the drawings he selected before I went to Stafford- 
 shire, but I have not heard of him or from him since. I fear he will 
 fail, unless he adopts my advice, and gets a practised hand, like 
 Ward, to help him with the archasological part of the business. I 
 fear he is getting some fifth-rate man to try to design patterns from 
 my drawings ; but though it seems easy enough to one who knows 
 the principle upon which the old patterns were composed, it is not 
 so easy to those who do not. Thus Tugin never saw the principle ; 
 the consequence is, that his patterns are entire failures ; and if he 
 failed, what is to be expected from a raw hand ? It is probable that 
 you will be obliged to have pattern windows intermixed with picture 
 ones ; but I should say, let the patterns harmonize with the pictures ; 
 which can only be done by allowing the same hand to do the work. 
 In other words, employ therefore foreigners entirely. I do not think 
 that the employment of the new glass is of equal importance with 
 keeping the whole work — picture- windows and pattern- windows, or 
 windows composed partly of pictures and partly of patterns — in 
 entire harmony, and this can only be done by employing the same 
 hand throuo-hout. 
 
 Most truly yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 ^o-" 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 27 
 
 VII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, r2th March, 1857. 
 
 I have been so engaged since I wrote that it was not until 
 last night that I was able to complete the inquiries I wished to make 
 respecting the cost of painted glass, when the cartoons are supplied 
 
 to the glass-painter as you suggested 
 
 As to the expediency of getting Hubner to execute cartoons for 
 the figures, and ^\'ard to execute the glass, I think, before you 
 resolve upon this, you should a little consider the matter in its anti- 
 quarian bearings. As I understand you, the object of employing 
 AVard is to secure pattern- work of the first order (and there is no 
 man who can approximate him in this), of a style in hannony with 
 that of the building, that is to say, a style like that of the old 
 patterns of the latter part of the thirteenth century, or early part of 
 the fourteenth ; and those patterns must of course be executed in the 
 new material, otherwise they must fail. On this last point I am so 
 clear that I defy contradiction ; and then, to use this powerful glass, 
 there must be no jemmification ^ of the pattern- work, it must be simple 
 and severe like that of the period I have named. AVhat, then, is the 
 probability of Hubner's figures being in an equally severe and simple 
 style ? If they should prove to be so, they will be the first German 
 figures that ever have been ; for all the German figures that I have 
 seen, even those in the Maria llilf Church at Munich, which are 
 associated with pattern- work of the early part of the fourteenth 
 century, are in the style of the sixteenth century, or latter part of 
 the fifteenth— a style far broader than that of the figures of the 
 thirteenth centuiy, more refined, and requiring a great deal more 
 (jf shadow in half-tint than the earlier figures do; besides having 
 much the same black lines in them, and consequently harmonizing 
 rather with the pattern- woik of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 
 than with that of the thirteenth or beginning of the fourteenth. I 
 suspect that the chances are that you would get your figures in one 
 stjde, and the pattern-work in another ; which would not only set 
 up the backs of the antiquaries, but would be positively wrong in 
 point of art, and inharmonious. I am cei-tain you must choose one 
 of two things, — either have your pattern- work to match the building, 
 and make your figure-work match the pattern- work, or else disregard 
 the date of the building, and let the style of your figures be that of 
 the pattern. For my own part, I should say, if you can get really 
 first-rate artistical figures, which would harmonize with pattern-work 
 of the earlier period, this should be the course; but if there is a 
 
 ^ This alludes to the term jemmy-Gothic— z".c. mock Gotliic — or modern imitation 
 of the old Gothic. 
 
28 BIOGRArHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 doubt about it, and you know that you can get artistical figures of a 
 later period, do not hesitate for one moment to embrace the latter 
 alternative. The most rigid adherence to antiquarianism cannot 
 compensate for a want of art, when, by another course, really good 
 art can be secured. But, as I tell the juries, " This, gentlemen, is a 
 matter for your consideration, not mine, and I thank God for it." 
 
 As a matter of general effect, I agree with Marochetti, as I before 
 said, and this was not a new idea to me, for it came across me on 
 seeing the cathedral. But, if the Committee think otherwise, if any 
 warning of mine is of any weight, let me impress most strongly on 
 
 their minds that the employment of can only lead to utter 
 
 failure ; even supposing they should consent to paying for artistic 
 
 superintendence in the manner proposed. knows little about 
 
 any sort of glass-painting, and of an early style he knows no 
 more than a child, and his friend even less. He has no idea of 
 the principle upon which the old windows are composed,' or of the 
 defects in their composition ; he does not understand the means of 
 remedying those defects; but as I see that he has already made 
 an impression on some of the Committee, I should not be surprised 
 if, after all, he succeeded, and that the progress of glass-painting 
 remained where it was, if the Committee hesitate at all about send- 
 ing the matter abroad. However, I have said all I can, and I can 
 only add to the formal words, " Gentlemen, consider your verdict," 
 mind, if you are wrong, there can be no such thing as granting a 
 new trial. , 
 
 Believe me very truly yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 16tli March, 1857. 
 
 I have been reading the report as carefully as if it were a 
 special plea, and I think it admirable ; nor does anything at present 
 occur to me that would do anything else than weaken what j^ou have 
 so pointedly put. 
 
 If the Royal factory at Munich will execute the whole of the 
 windows at 21. a foot, by all means embrace their offer; for you 
 will by this means secure a homogeneity which can be effected by 
 no other means. It was the idea of emplojdng different artists 
 (foreigners), hinted at in the report, which I disliked, but I came 
 over to it, as a matter of necessity, which is the way in which the 
 report puts it. 
 
 I say, by all means throw antiquarianism overboard, if it and 
 art are not capable of a union under existing circumstances. I am 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 29 
 
 so used to associate the brilliant and powerful hues of the thirteenth 
 century with the designs of that period, that the latter would lose 
 all interest in my eyes if unaccompanied with what I consider the 
 essential condition to their good effect — glass of similar texture to 
 that of the thirteenth century — and, therefore, as an antiquary, I 
 should most strongly recommend, in the event of the Munich artists 
 being employed, the adoption of a style as late as that of the early 
 part of the sixteenth or end of the fifteenth century (which does not 
 exclude the use of medallions), because I feel persuaded that this 
 style will best harmonize with their workmanship. To-day I am 
 not busy, so I shall make the attempt to see Mr. Stirling by calling 
 on him. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 IX. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 25th March, 1857. 
 
 I have carefully read your last letter, and I have come to the 
 same conclusion that you have done, viz. that we both mean the 
 same thing, though our modes of expressing slightly differ. As to 
 what you say of, as it were, striking out a new style of treatment, it 
 is precisely what I meant when I wrote that book, 'An Inquiry 
 into the Difference in Style in Painted Glass.' I had not looked at 
 it for years till last night, when I read through the chapter beginning 
 at p. 268. I was surprised to find how little of it I should wish 
 altered, were it now to be rewritten ; and I am pleased at this, and 
 to observe that your thoughts, working from a different point, have 
 tended so nearly to the same conclusion ; because that chapter in 
 particular exposed me to the censure and misrepresentation of the 
 earnest men. I wish you would just run your eye over it ; it is very 
 short. I am quite sensible that the having been steeped in anti- 
 quarianism has to a certain extent obscured my judgment. I feel it 
 more than I can express ; if you could read my thoughts you would 
 be astonished how much my mode of thinking is fettered by this 
 sort of learning ; but I am the more willing to follow the advice of 
 others. 
 
 I made the second sketch with the circles, more for the sake of 
 contrast than as indicating the sort of design I should myself prefer ; 
 and T think the only point on which there is the least difference 
 between us is, the use of a plain, deep-coloured ground of colour, 
 where anything is represented which conveys a greater idea of 
 depth than a mere group of figures — as a landscape or a canopy. At 
 the same time, I confess I see no difference in principle between 
 
30 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 putting a group of figures, arranged on the arc of a semicircle, on a 
 stiif, deep-coloured ground, and a similar group with a canopy over 
 it, as in your sketches; and yet to my eye it does not appear to 
 be right. But I should like to have your opinion upon it. Vvhether 
 it is that seeing the ground at A,^ and again seeing the ground at B, 
 with the dark sofiit C between, makes one at once suppose that it is 
 sky, and not a mere coloured ground, I know not. But I confess, 
 whenever I see a canopy thus represented, I always long to take a 
 sponge and wash out the ground, till it becomes as light as the blue 
 sky-colour used in the glass-paintings of the fifteenth and sixteenth 
 centuries. In the Brussels glass, the sky-blue ground within the 
 arches, which breaks the figures, is as light as the sky, so that here 
 there is no violation of probability ; at the same time, one regards 
 groups in panels (as in some of Raphael's works), backed by a deep- 
 coloured ground, with complacency. Is not this the reason that, in 
 the latter case, conventionality is not too forced, in the former it is ? 
 This has been a great puzzle to me a long while, for I am sure that 
 in matters of taste it does not do to fetter oneself by what is called 
 " a principle." In the earliest glass one does not observe the defect, 
 owing, I suppose, to the very conventional manner in which the 
 canopies are represented, not unlike the archways one sees in 
 the Eoman bas-reliefs; but in proportion as the canopy becomes 
 more natural — as in Decorated work, for instance — it always seems 
 to me that the deep-coloured ground becomes more obviously wrong. 
 I think the artists of the sixteenth century must have felt some mis- 
 givings on this point, for I do not know of a single instance in which 
 depth is forced upon one's mind by architectural lines or by a land- 
 scape, or by anything in short which carries one's eyes beyond the 
 group, that the back colour does not recede by its lightness. At 
 the same time, they got a great deal of stiff, deep colour by putting 
 the head of their canopy- work on a stiff ground, so as to give the 
 idea of the picture being framed in stifi' ornament. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 X. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 6th April, 1857. 
 
 Many thanks for your most interesting and valuable commu- 
 nication. I had suspected that there must have been some corre- 
 sponding practice in other branches of art ; but your note is conclusive, 
 and I shall deposit it in a place where I keep valuable documents. 
 
 This refers to a sketch in tlie letter. 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSOX. 31 
 
 I see no objection to sucli a canopy as you suggest, but then pains 
 must be taken to make it appear to stand for no more than it pro- 
 fesses to be. I am certain that the mediteval examples had their 
 origin in pure ignorance. They did not give the projection of the 
 hood, because they did not know how; and they did not show 
 the recess of the niche, for a similar reason. I have several examples 
 showing abortive attempts at perspective, or even of shading the 
 interior of the niche, which, I think, quite bear out what I say, that 
 it was ignorance, and ignorance alone, that occasioned the use of 
 canopies so treated. This is not an uncommon form of fourteenth- 
 century canopy-work, — which is certainly intended to represent a 
 real spire.^ The Early English canopies are the same in principle, 
 though, owing to their greater simplicity, one hardly sees it at first. 
 The great thing to guard against in these matters is the over- 
 stepping the bounds of conventionality, and for this reason I have 
 hitherto preferred panels, ostensibly such, to any other species of 
 decoration ; yet I do not see any reason why the conventionality of a 
 panel ought to be extended ; only, as I said before, it must be done 
 with judgment, not in the way some modern lights would have 
 it done. 
 
 Youi-s most truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XL 
 
 18th May, 1857. 
 [The first part of this letter is wanting.] 
 I feel almost certain that the only modification the foreigTi design 
 is capable of would be in the form of the ornament. I do not think 
 it would be any improvement; for the German foKage is broader 
 than the thirteenth century, and therefore more suitable to a poor 
 material ; but you might contrive to shade the foliage of the thir- 
 teenth century natm-ally, like drawings taken from the existing 
 bosses in Glasgow Cathedral, and so, perhaps, one would do as well 
 as the other. But I question whether anything would satisfy critics, 
 short of imitating not merely the drawing, but the simple mode of 
 execution of the thii^teenth century. I know what an uproar was 
 raised against Nixon's window in Westminster Abbey, where the 
 ornament is copied from that of the sculpture of the thirteenth cen- 
 tury, giving natural shadows, &g. 
 
 A sketch in the margm. 
 
32 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 XII. 
 
 [No date, but apparently written May, 1857.] 
 The adoption of a later style would by no means necessitate 
 any alteration in the general plan of a design; the groups could, 
 I think, be put in medallions, but the character of the ornament 
 would be more refined than that of the thirteenth century, and the 
 colouring broader. The south transept of Angers Cathedral in 
 France perfectly illustrates my views. There is a circular window 
 there, the stone-work of which is of the thirteenth century, but the 
 glazing is of the fifteenth : and it is worthy of remark that the 
 general arrangement of the glazing is so exactly in accordance 
 with a design of the thirteenth century, that it is clear it must have 
 been copied from it, only such alterations being made in the detail as 
 would bring it into the style of the fifteenth century in this respect. 
 I think, if this suggestion were adopted, you would completely 
 obtain the benefit of an early fourteenth-century design, and at the 
 same time introduce nothing which would not completely accord 
 with the practice of the modern Munich glass-painters. I may, 
 perhaps, be too straitlaced in my views, but this is the only point 
 that has occurred to me worth mentioning. 
 
 Yours faithfully, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XIII. 
 
 Dear Wilson, Temple, 24th May, 1857. 
 
 I have been at work from 10 till 3 to-day, making the drawing 
 I enclose, for which I trust you will give me absolution for not 
 having been to church. I see many things wrong, and I should 
 like to do it all over again, but I really have no time, and therefore 
 I send it to you with all its imperfections on its head, as I know you 
 to be a good-natured critic. 
 
 I think it right on principle ; at least it expresses generally all 
 that I mean. And now I will give up my authorities. First, the 
 idea of dividing a window into panels is taken from one of the clear- 
 stoiy windows at Bourges. I do not think there is any print of it 
 extant, but my note says that the window is thus divided.^ 
 
 The forms of panels I have adopted are from recollection of early 
 tracery; and you will see something of the same sort in your 
 windows at Glasgow, only the patterns there, I thought, would not 
 do for glass, if exactly copied ; some are so, as you will see on looking 
 at the plate in your report. 
 
 ^ A sketch is inserted in this letter. 
 
Arr. LETTERS TO MR. C. H. WILSOX. 33 
 
 The way of getting colour in (red) is shown in a window from 
 Trumpington, near Cambridge, temp. 1290, of which I have a 
 drawing. 
 
 The border is treated just like some of those splendid Cinquecento 
 ones at St. Peter's, Cologne, of which there is a notable example at 
 Lichfield. Xow the drawing on it could be easily taken from Early 
 English scrollwork. I made the pattern a little too dark at first, 
 and had to scratch it ofi", which, by the way, gives exactly the efiect 
 of a Cinquecento border that has suffered from age. 
 
 The scroll-work wants a great deal of amendment 
 
 You miLst in charity accept the principal figure as an antique. I 
 sketched it merely to show the sort of drapeiy I mean, which is so 
 much more severe than that of the fifteenth centurj'. Badly as I 
 have done it, it puts the unhappy mediseval at top to shame, and 
 shows, I think, to what quarter we ought to have recourse for 
 models. 
 
 I have coloured the whole thing as rawly as I could, in order, as 
 far as possible, to give the effect of modern glass, but with all my 
 pains I fear I have coloured it more powerfully than the glass. But 
 on looking at it carefull}', the only thing I think 1 have been guilty 
 of is, colouring the red deeper, perhaps, than it can be made to look 
 in glass. However, this can be diapered in execution, and, without 
 thinking of it, I was trying to g-ive the efiect of a diaper. 
 
 I beg to say that the shield at bottom is not a lit too big, for an 
 archaeologist at least. 
 
 Yours ever, 
 
 C. WlXSTOX. 
 
 P.S. — You must not expect to find any precedent of an old window 
 like what I have sketched. 1 have only followed the old designs in 
 principle. This is on the same principle as the ordinaiy figure and 
 canopy windows, only the divisions are made with more panels, as in 
 the medallion windows, so that the design is a union of both. 
 
 I am convinced that you cannot make a design severe enough by 
 foliage alone ; there must be decided forms. Ward and Xixon tried 
 it repeatedly, and always failed like the rest. Foliage alone would 
 do well for that beautiful Gei-man design, but then he has got 
 solidity by his white gTound in the spandrils at bottom. Mind, 
 1 still greatly prefer his design. This is only for a pis aller. Xone 
 of the important parts of my sketch will ever mn together; the 
 oraaments — the scrolls I mean — may in some places, but this ^\ill 
 not sig-nify, as their chief use is to produce an effect of colour. You 
 will find no such thin lines of white, against thin lines of yellow, as 
 in that figure and canopy sketch you sent. 
 
34 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App 
 
 XIV. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, llth June, 1857. 
 
 I have not had time to look at your MS. ; but the little 
 pamphlet I have read with great satisfaction and profit. It is 
 v^onderful how you have hit the nail in sajdng that the employers 
 ought to go to school. If the upper classes had but a little art 
 instruction, we should not see glass-painting in England in so 
 utterly a disgraceful state. 
 
 I agree with you most cordially in your condemnation of Gothic 
 forms. The Houses of Parliament displease most antiquaries, 
 because not one particle of the decoration is really like old — 
 it is neither one thing nor the other. It has all the spirit of old 
 work taken out of it. It is, in short, jemmy-Gothic* — the only 
 expression which adequately conve^^s an idea of the Gothic of the 
 nineteenth century. 
 
 The Gothic designs for the Government offices are bad; and the 
 best of it is, that without a single exception they are all taken from 
 foreign Gothic ! So much for those who object to Italian as an 
 exotic. Indeed the Italian designs have it all their own way ; and 
 mediajvalism is signally defeated in the opinion of every one whom 
 I have seen. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XV. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 18th June, 1857. 
 
 Mr. M came here to-day, bringing with him a design 
 
 of Capronnier's, with which he seemed much smitten, and the 
 sketch you had made from the little rough sketch I sent. I told 
 him that Capronnier's was far too mosaic in its character to produce 
 any good effect in modern glass. Your sketch was already marked 
 "Not approved. B.Hall," at which I was not surprised, for you 
 had retained the fifteenth-century figure, instead of a thirteenth- 
 century or a Greek one, as I had indicated. But as it seems 
 decided that there are to be no more crypt-windows, for fear of 
 making the place too dark, it does not much signify. But I want 
 particularly to call your attention to studying the subject most 
 deeply. 
 
 No good can be done with regard to the main windows without 
 
 See note, p. 27. 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSOX. 35 
 
 making some of those IMiinicli people come over and see tlie building ; 
 and then you must try and indoctrinate them with the principle, 
 that what is wanted is a nineteenth-century design fit for nine- 
 teenth-century glass, but at the same time harmonizing with a 
 thirteenth or foui'teenth-century building. And to do this you 
 must 3'ourself study the subject ; for without you I do not know 
 where the Committee will be. . . . 
 
 You]s truly, 
 
 C. WlXSTOX. 
 
 XVL 
 
 I\Iy DEAE Wilsox, Temple, 2(jtli Jiine, 1857. 
 
 I wrote a very hurried note to you last evening, just as I 
 was going out to dinner ; and on reading your note more carefullv 
 afterwards, I j^erceive that I have not answered your argument as 
 carefully as I could have done. 
 
 Xo doubt, if common sense alone were to be our guide, we should 
 wish the windows to be done in the style with which the artist is 
 most familiar, and which no doubt in this particular case is very 
 much adapted to the only material we can procure to work upon. 
 This was the universal practice in the middle ages. Every work, 
 whether a restoration, an addition, or an embellishment, was done 
 in the style of the time, without the least reference to the style of 
 any other period ; and the success of the mediaeval works depends, 
 I believe, almost entirely on the freedom thus accorded to the artist. 
 But in these days we seek to make up for the loss of all original 
 artistic power by a display of archaeological learning. There is no 
 use to attempt to stem the stream ; all that we can hope to do is to 
 give it a harmless direction. 
 
 We know that late German work is best suited to the modem 
 material; but we also know that the archaeologists would be in 
 arms at what they would call such a violation of style as to put 
 late fifteenth-century work into the w^indows of a thirteenth-century 
 building. Therefore, as we are too wise to have imitations of the 
 glass of the thirteenth century — knowing that such designs would 
 produce a worse efi"ect than the modern German, if executed in the 
 modern material — we have recourse to a compromise which shall 
 satisfy the archaeologist, as far as such a thing can be done without 
 relinquishing our own principle. And therefore we say, make your 
 design broad and highly finished to suit the material, but let the 
 fonns employed resemble as nearly as possible the forms used in 
 the architecture and art of the thiiieenth century, in order to 
 satisfy the archaeologists. No doubt these forms must all undergo 
 
 I) 2 
 
36 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 a considerable ehaTige in order to enable the work to be executed 
 softly and broadly ; but still the whole object of adopting such 
 forms at all is to exhibit a resemblance between the old architec- 
 ture and its modern embellishment; and therefore it is that I am 
 unable to see how we could answer to the archaeologists if we 
 adopted forms of ornament a good deal resembling forms of orna- 
 ment in the thirteenth century, and ret declined to admit the use 
 of forms of drapery a good deal resembling forms of drapery in the 
 thirteenth centurv. 
 
 XYII. 
 
 Deau W11.SON, Temple, 15th August, 1857. 
 
 ****** 
 
 If any advance is to be made, it must be by employing the best 
 artists in glass that can be got ; and the best artists are unques- 
 tionably the Munich glass-painters. There is no one artist of the 
 English school so far superior to the others as to render his employ- 
 ment a matter in the propriety of which all must concur. So far 
 from it, if one English glass-painter were employed, it would be 
 very difficult to deny the propriety of employing others; and if 
 one or two were employed, why should not all, when the shades 
 of difference between them are so slight? I am sure of this, — if 
 once the question is opened, and the prestige of the Mimich school 
 given up, it will be all up with the Committee and everybody 
 else. 
 
 I entirely agree that the Munich school is not by any means 
 perfect; it is rather a school of art in the abstract than of art as 
 applied to painted glass ; and I say, as I always have said, that in 
 point of execution Hedgeland's work at Norwich, and Nixon's at 
 Christchurch, Bloornsbury, are more glass-like, and therefore more 
 correct, than any of the Munich work. But, then, what is gained 
 in technical excellence is lost in art; and considering that the 
 lesson most needed to be inculcated on the English glass-painters 
 is, that glass-painting ought to be artistical, I think, on the 
 whole, that it is better to have art without transparency than 
 transparency without art. I agree with Mr. Petit, that it seems 
 hard that so large a place as Glasgow Cathedral should be given up 
 to the Germans ; but the question is, how is the thing to be carried 
 through practically? Your subscribers will not wait ten or twelve 
 years for an English school to develop itself : nothing will satisfy 
 them but to fill the windows at once. It would therefore be im- 
 possible to leave a part of the cathedral blank fur the reception of 
 English glass when English artists shall be found able to execute 
 it in a style of art as high as the Germans. So there is nothing 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 37 
 
 for it but to fill the whole cathedral with foreign glass, and to con- 
 sider that by so doing a great step forward has been made ; and to 
 leave it to others to give opportunity for a display of improvement 
 upon the Germans. 
 
 My own private impression is, that Marochetti and Ward might, 
 with the new glass, execute the whole thing in a way greatly 
 superior to the Germans ; but I could not venture to recommend 
 the experiment, for experiment it would be. 
 
 To show how sincere I am in this, I will mention what I am 
 about in regard to the tw^o new Temple windows, small and insig- 
 nificant as they are as compared with your great work. AVe have 
 got the glass perfect as a material. It is as fine as any old glass 
 ever was ; and I am certain that the ornamentation and general 
 arrangement are right in reference to the position of the windows 
 and the style of the building ; but then I know that the groups will 
 be failures — that is, they will not be so high in point of art, as the 
 glass is excellent in colour, and the design correct. As money was 
 no object to me, I did very seriously think of commissioning Maro- 
 chetti to design the groups ; but, though I have the greatest con- 
 fidence in him, I, on consideration, came to the conclusion that the 
 time had not yet arrived, and that it was better for me to work out 
 the problem on which I am engaged, in the way in which I am 
 certain that it must be worked out, with such resources as I pos- 
 sessed, instead of risking a total failure through Marochetti's mis- 
 understanding my drift. 
 
 It would be affectation to conceal the fact that I feel my own 
 strength as an archeeologist. For twenty-five years and more I 
 have been doing just what you are now doing — working hard at the 
 subject critically — and therefore I have a right to entertain strong 
 convictions ; but Marochetti also would have a right to question 
 these convictions, and it w^ould be useless for me to attempt to 
 argue the subject with him until he had himself likewise studied 
 it. I can only convince him by an appeal to his; eye-sight ; and 
 therefore I have thought it better to try to express my meaning 
 clumsily, in the hope that hereafter I may be able, through his 
 assistance, to see the thing properly carried out, than to waste more 
 of m}' life in arguments which it is beyond the power of language to 
 express so clearly as to exclude the possibility of their being mis- 
 understood. If, therefore, I do not choose to risk a total failuie in 
 a small thing like this, you may easily understand my want of 
 courage to recommend such a course to you. . . . 
 
 Therefore I say, stick to Munich, and be content that Glasgow 
 shall be regarded as the cradle of that (superior to German) school 
 of glass-painting which it is Mr. Petit's as well as your and my 
 wish to see flourishing in this country. 
 
 I have gone to such a length that I have no time to caution you 
 
38 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 against some hasty conclusions, in respect of the naturalness of the 
 Decorated style, into which you seem to be fallen. I will write 
 again. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 C. W. 
 
 XVIIL 
 
 Dear Wilson, Temple, 18tl) August, 1857. 
 
 ****** 
 
 The style of your ornamentation must, in my opinion, be regu- 
 lated by the texture of your material ; for if there is one point more 
 thoroughly established than another in point of fact, it is that in 
 ancient glass the style of the ornamentation and treatment of the 
 material varied with the texture of the material. And this was 
 artistic enough, because a powerful material neither required, nor in- 
 deed would show, any very delicate ornamentation or soft shading ; 
 whereas a weaker sort of glass required more painter's manipula- 
 tion to give it force ; and paintings executed in it in the same simple 
 way as the earlier ones would have looked thin and miserable. 
 
 I have been very much amused at noticing, throughout the 
 notes on glass you lent me, your complaint of the want of half- 
 tint. Of course jou are right ; and the reason was, that in every 
 one of the glass-paintings you were criticising they had ignorantly 
 used, along with the simple mode of execution practised in the 
 thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, a kind of glass far more pel- 
 lucid and flimsy in texture than the glass of those centuries, or 
 indeed than the glass of the fifteenth century, in which one always 
 sees a great amount of half-tint. The Germans, being artists, and 
 knowing how very pellucid is the ordinary material, have used 
 more shadow in their glass-paintings than one sees in any old 
 glass -painting ; and perhaps they have gone a little too far in this 
 respect ; and it is in reference to the probability of the work being 
 executed in Germany that I wished to make these suggestions to 
 Mr. S and yourself. 
 
 I think that the character of the windows demands small pictures 
 in medallions, whether consisting of groups or single figures. But,- 
 supposing that the artists of the fifteenth century had had to fill the 
 window, and supposing that they had taken it into their heads to 
 follow the more ancient designs (as was actually done by them in 
 the south Eose of Angers Cathedral in France, and in the window 
 of Conway church in Wales), they would have followed the ancient 
 design only in general, and would have worked out all the details 
 according to their own practice. Thus, they would have used 
 
Apr. LETTERS TO MR. C. H. WILSOX. 39 
 
 a great deal more of tertiary colours, broader draperies, broader 
 ornaments, thinner lines, and more soft shades; though they 
 Avould have retained the general arrangement of the design, the 
 same general relation of the picture part to the ornamental part, 
 the same general forms of panels, &c. But the effect, owing to the 
 weaker nature of the material, might have been weaker than the 
 older design ; yet, owing to the harmony between the nature of 
 the material and the mode of working it, the window would have 
 looked only more delicate than the old one — not more flimsy than 
 the old one, as our modern antiques do 
 
 Then as regards other matters. There is nothing really new in 
 the glass arrangements of the fourteenth century, as compared with 
 those of the thirteenth, except those necessitated by the employ- 
 ment of mullioned windows. Thus, tiaceiy -lights were a novelty, 
 but the general design is borrowed from the Eaiiy English medal- 
 lion; so also is the carrying a group of figures beyond the limits 
 of a single light ; but the prototype of this was the can-ying a 
 subject through two or more medallions in an Early English window. 
 
 The great feature of Decorated glass is the use of the canopy 
 over the figure or group ; but the thirteenth-century artists also 
 used canopies (over single figures, and rarel}^ over groups). But 
 this use of the canopy is the very worst part of their practice ; for 
 the canopy is rather an oddly-terminated panel than a niche ; and 
 though I see no objection to canopies in the abstract, still I cannot 
 bat regard the use of the canopy in Decorated work, unimproved, 
 as a strong proof of feeble art, it being so easy to cover a space 
 with something like a tabernacle, as compared with the difficulty 
 of arranging figures or groups in panels, as in the Early English 
 medallion windows. 
 
 Then in the scrolls. The Early English, though taken from 
 Eoman work, are perfectly original; and they are rich and varied, 
 and present to my mind a favourable contrast to the miserable 
 tendiil (and most unnatural, because in some respects copied from 
 nature) scrolls of the Decorated period. This sort of scrolls, with- 
 out the least eftbrt, are capable of indefinite extension. There is 
 rarely that subordination of the smaller coils to the bigger ones, 
 which, as in Greek scroll-work, was so carefully attended to in 
 Early English work. 
 
 The colouring of the glass — I mean the tint of individual pieces 
 — was best in the twelfth century. It slightly deteriorated in the 
 early part of the thirteenth, and continued with little variation 
 until about 1370, when it very greatly altered for the worse. This 
 close identity of colour makes it difficult sometimes to distinguish 
 the white-pattern Decorated w^indows from the Early English white- 
 pattern windows ; but a closer inspection shows the superiority of 
 the latter. .... 
 
40 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 My own impression of Decorated glass is, that in some instances, 
 and those invariably the earlier ones, one finds it as good nearly as 
 the Early English, but that in the great majority of cases it is 
 greatly inferior. 
 
 The best Decorated work is, however, about the date of your own 
 Cathedral — the latter part of the reign of Edward I. This glass is 
 transitional in character, Early English and Decorated details often 
 occurring in the same window : sometimes in the same building, 
 and in glass of the same age, one window has all its details, its 
 scroll- work, &c.. Early English, the other Decorated. And it was 
 seeing this, and thereby that greater variety and go in the ornament 
 might be ensured by adopting Early English details, that, on the 
 whole, I thought you would do well to borrow from the Early 
 English rather than from the Decorated style. Still, either would 
 do. But if you did adopt the Early English, it would be a wise 
 precaution to give a little more Greek character to the figures, and 
 not, as is done by the old artists, to adopt the same style of figures 
 without regard to the ornament : not that there need be much dif- 
 ference in the figures — not more than one sees between Nicholas 
 Pisano's work and the Early English of the middle of the thirteenth 
 century. 
 
 I think the Early English medallion is on the whole the most 
 correct in point of principle when deep glass is going to be used ; 
 and the Decorated panel is so nearly alike that this would do as 
 well. But I do not like canopies. I still think that an arrange- 
 ment of panels, large enough to include single figures four feet high, 
 will be the best thing, using Decorated or Early English ornament 
 as you like. The shallower antiquaries would of course prefer the 
 Decorated. But, as I have shown, you have your option. In speak- 
 ing of Early English or thirteenth-century ornament, I do not 
 mean that of the twelfth, of which there is much figured in the 
 Bourges Book. All that from Sens and Canterbury there deli- 
 neated is of the twelfth century 
 
 I have spun an outrageous long yarn. I only wish you were 
 here to see the examples with which I can exemplify it. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XIX. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Rbyl, Flintslm-e, 1st Sept. 1857. 
 
 I return your lecture, which is excellent, and if it gets into 
 print I wish you would send me a cop}-. 
 
 The only point on which I should be inclined to differ from what 
 
App. letters to IklE. C. H. WILSON. 41 
 
 you say, as it stands, is where you appear to me to rather too broadly 
 class Cinquecento glass-paintings with those of a later style. I 
 agree with you that the flatness of a wall-decoration is a thing not 
 to be disregarded. But what I say is this, — there is no harm in 
 having a landscape background done sufficiently well to tell its 
 stor}^ provided it is not so perfectly done as to produce illusion. 
 Raphael's cartoons are, therefore, proper for wall-decorations, be- 
 cause, though they do represent objects in more than one plane, the 
 representation, though ampl}^ sufficient for its purpose, is yet not 
 carried to such a pitch as to destroy the flatness of the wall, as might 
 have been the case if the landscape had been carried out to the pitch 
 of some of Turner's. And so with regard to painted glass : if the 
 artists are content to use coloured glass, and only enamel brown and 
 the yellow stain, as the Cinquecento artists did, I defy them to 
 produce so close an imitation of nature as shall prove illusive, and 
 so destroy the wall-line, though nature shall yet be so far imitated 
 as to render it unnecessary for the artist to write on the background 
 " This is a landscape ;" whereas, if enamel colouring is used, land- 
 scapes may be so accurately represented as to be illusive, as in some 
 of the Munich glass in Cologne Cathedral. I grant that, if the prin- 
 ciple is a rigid one, the Cinquecento artists are wrong. But my 
 experience of law makes me indifferent to the charge of things being 
 contrary to principle, even in art ; for how often does it turn out 
 that truth resides in an exception to a principle ! In other w^ords, 
 what are often called principles are, in fact, nothing but general 
 rules — highly useful when treated .as general rules, but which, 
 when relied on as principles, are too often found to prove mere 
 dogmas, resting on too narrow a foundation. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 C. WlXSTON. 
 
 XX. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Swan, Wolverhampton, 17th Sept. 1857. 
 
 My holidays are over, and I am holding the courts of this 
 district till the end of October, when I return to town. 
 
 I have seen more than a usual quantity of modem glass during 
 my late peregrinations in England and AVales, and certainly, if 
 anything, the art has loAvered even during the last year 
 
 Yesterday I had a blank day, which I partly filled up by a walk 
 
 to B , where is a window by , which I think he wanted 
 
 you to see. Certainly, as times go, it is a very commendable work ; 
 but its chief merit, if I am not greatly mistaken, consists in its being 
 constructed of the new material, which certainl}^ gives it a substance 
 and tone which one looks for in vain in ordinary modern works. 
 
42 BIOGKAPHICAL MEMOIR. App, 
 
 The window is a white pattern window of three lights, with two 
 medallions, containing pictures, in each light. The window itself 
 is early Edw. II., and the style of the glass is unexceptionable. 
 The figures are very well drawn. The east window of the south 
 aisle of the same church is by . It is also a white pattern win- 
 dow of five lights, with two medallions in each light. The figures 
 displease me ; yet, making allowance for the difference of material, 
 
 's being of ordinary glass, I confess I saw but very little to 
 
 choose between the two windows when seen from a distance. And 
 this proves the wisdom of your objection to small groups of figures. 
 At a distance one sees nothing but a congeries of bits of glass, and 
 one judges of the window merely as of a coloured pattern, without 
 regard to drawing ; and this, I fancy, is the reason that educated 
 men so often talk without disgust of modern windows, the artistic 
 part of which is considerably below zero. 1 am, therefore, more 
 than ever persuaded of the truth of your views that the Glasgow 
 windows should be filled with groups and single figures of as large 
 a size as the conditions imposed by the heavy mullions in the win- 
 dows will admit, and consequently that Ilubner's idea of the general 
 arrangement is the right one, and that your aim should be to modify 
 this arrangement in conformity with the requirements of the anti- 
 quarian critics. 
 
 How completel}'' one sees in all this that the Gothic is not the 
 architectural style for the nineteenth century ! It may present its 
 broad masses, but thej^ are cut up into small parts — a truly barbaric 
 feature. With a religion at once simple and sublime, one would 
 think common sense would suggest' for its service a style far more 
 allied to the Greek than the Gothic — a style admitting of broad 
 square masses, yet of varied outline, of which one sees the most 
 wonderful hints at every turn in the furnaces, the forges, the ware- 
 houses, and mills, that cover the coalfields here. I am satisfied that 
 I could soon fill a sketch-book with some of the most excellent ideas 
 that can be conceived from these rough blocks. Well, some day, I 
 suppose, people will come to their senses, and then we shall see art 
 flourish. In the interim all its votaries must try to push it as far as 
 their chains will allow. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXL 
 
 My dkar Wilson, October, 1857. 
 
 My object in writing is to put you on your guard against 
 supposing that the Decorated st^de is, in this country at least, and 
 especially in painted glass, a more progressive style than the Early 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 43 
 
 English ; thongli I do not see that this question has much practical 
 bearing on the matter in hand. All my researches tend to the con- 
 clusion that the pure Byzantine style ended about 1170, about 
 which period the commencement of modern art may be dated. No 
 doubt, in some respects, as in the formation of the eye, you see the 
 influence of Byzantine art until tlie early part of the fourteenth 
 century ; but then these peculiarities were succeeded by other con- 
 ventionalities even further removed from nature ; and upon the 
 whole I should say that, in drawing and expression, mediaeval art 
 reached its perfection about the middle of the thirteenth century, 
 and continued in a declining state until it arose again to perfection 
 in the sixteenth century. Nothing can be worse than the figure- 
 drawing in the glass-paintings of even as early a period as the reign 
 of Edward II. They are most abominable conventionalisms, entirely 
 devoid of that go which one sees so clearly in the roughest works of 
 the first half of the thirteenth century. The faces are flat and un- 
 interesting, the attitudes contorted and affected, and the draperies 
 heavy and so full of large folds as to utterly fail to suggest the idea 
 of there being a human body underneath. I have no doubt that it 
 is the bad art of the decorated figures and glass generally that makes 
 the Decorated period so great a favourite with our enlightened 
 glasswrights. 1 know from experience that it takes double the time 
 and trouble to copy an Early English figure, generally, that it does 
 to copy a Decorated one. Still no doubt in the early part of the 
 fourteenth century, or latter part of the thirteenth, there is some 
 fine work, not unlike the style of Nicholas Pisano ; but this soon 
 went out, and was succeeded by the conventional style I have 
 mentioned. 
 
 The Early English, as it appears to me, is a development of the 
 ancient Greek style, possessing, with much of its grace, a great deal 
 of a different feeling altogether, which one sees in its perfect develop- 
 ment in the works of Raphael. No doubt, here and there, one meets 
 with figures in which the Byzantine type was more strictly adhered 
 to, especially in the representations of our Lord, and these are the 
 works which are given on a large scale in the Bourges Book ; but I 
 can assure you these are the exceptions and not the rule, and that 
 there is more varied expression, more natural movement, and in- 
 finitely more dignity in the figures of the thirteenth-century glass- 
 paintings up to about 1270, than there is at any subsequent period ; 
 and I think it is so in the sculpture. The figures on the south door- 
 way at Lincoln, figured in Flaxman's work on sculpture, are as early 
 as the middle of the thirteenth century, and it is astonishing how 
 fine, like the Greek, and yet how much less conventional and natural, 
 are their draperies; whereas the sculpture in the Angel choir, which 
 is about twenty-five years later, is inferior, though certainly fine. 
 There are the thick-folded draperies and the flat faces that one sees 
 
44 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 in the later work. Cockerell says that these are the finest of the 
 two ; but I doubt if you would think so if you compared the originals 
 together. I know it is a great deal easier to draw the choir figures 
 than those of the south door, which to me is a strong proof that there 
 is more in the latter than in the former ; and so it is in the French 
 sculpture. The best is about the middle of the thirteenth century ; 
 after this it becomes mannered, just as ours does. I grant that there 
 is a very Greek feeling in the thirteenth-century draperies ; but those 
 of the fourteenth only show what things must come to when there is 
 no standard of excellence present to the eye of the sculptor, or pre- 
 served in his mind by the influence of tradition. It was Greek art 
 that elevated the mediaeval aiiists of the thirteenth century, just as 
 it did the mediaeval artists of the sixteenth ; it was the absence of 
 Greek art, or of the tradition of it, that caused the mediaeval artists 
 to flounder on in the most outrageous and unnatural conventionality, 
 from the latter part of tlie thirteenth century till the beginning of 
 the sixteenth ; yet the thirteenth-century art is not Byzantine — it is 
 mediaeval art, sublimated by the traditions of the Byzantine. 
 ****** 
 [The remainder of this letter (which is without date) is wanting.] 
 
 XXII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Rliyl, Flintshire, 8th Nov. 1857. 
 
 I have completed my work in the courts, and I am here airing 
 myself till Tuesday, when I go on a visit to Shrewsbury, and thence 
 to London on Saturday ; and as idleness is the root of mischief, I 
 propose to give you a chapter on Dirt, if that is not a misnomer, 
 the authoritative definition of the subject being " matter in the 
 wrong place." 
 
 The question of "la patina" has engaged my attention for some 
 time, and the conclusion I have long since arrived at is precisely 
 the same as Mr. Ainmiiller's. No manipulation that would not be 
 desti-uctive of the painting will produce the same broken effect that 
 time produces. For instance, you may diaper the glass as cleverly 
 as possible, yet it will look flat and hard, unless you make the 
 ground of the diaper dee^jer or lighter in places quite irregularl}'-, 
 irrespective of the pattern. So with regard to shadows or anything 
 else : the eff*ect of age is j)lus all efforts of art : it softens what would 
 otherwise be harsh, without necessarily impairing the painting. This 
 is exemplified in those windows at King's College, Cambridge, which 
 have been cleaned. The black dirt which obscured or inteifered 
 with the painting has been removed ; but the lighter discoloration, 
 the beeswing of age, still remains and softens all the flat parts ; and 
 the difficulty has always been how to produce this admirable effect 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 45 
 
 by artificial means. At Ely Cathedral you must have obseiTed many 
 wonderful efforts of genius in this particular ; but that they should 
 have all failed is not surprising, when you perceive that the mode 
 of applying the dirt is precisely the reverse of nature's. 
 
 In all English and French glass that I have seen antiquated, the 
 process has been to bedaub the whole individual piece, and then to 
 rub away some of the dirt in the centre of the piece ; whereas nature 
 bedaubs the centre of the piece, leaving, in general, a considerable 
 space near the leads, all round the edges, comparatively clear. The 
 effect in the former case is, when the pieces of glass are very small, 
 to make the whole design look as if it were greasy — as if it were 
 made up of lumps of different-coloured fats, each limip having its 
 own proper high light, like the little dumplings one sees swimming 
 about in mutton-broth; whilst the effect in the latter case is to 
 impart that sparkling brilliancy which is so much admired. I will 
 make on the next sheet a diagram of the two methods, A being the 
 first, B the second. 
 
 I have tried all sorts of ways to produce the effect B on glass, 
 without the smallest success, until it suddenly occurred to me that 
 if something could be applied to glass, after it had been leaded 
 together, and which would stick without being burned, at all events 
 one would have the advantage of applying the stuff judiciously in 
 those parts, and in such proportions as would produce the best 
 effect, in the same way as I touch up my own drawings, after they 
 are otherwise finished, with a view to produce the effect of "la 
 patina," which process seems so greatly to have pleased Maro- 
 chetti ; and then I recollected I had seen mortar adhering to glass, 
 which probably had been there 400 or 500 years, as may often be 
 observed in tracery lights : so I thought I would try, and the effect 
 was perfect. The projection of the leads prevented the biTish from 
 touching the glass near the edges of the different pieces, which 
 therefore remained clear, except where accidentally splashed ; whilst 
 I could apply the composition at pleasure, exactly as I touched up 
 my own drawings. 
 
 The next improvement was to use hydraulic lime instead of common 
 lime, because the magnesia in it would occasion a better set, and so 
 prevent the mortar being washed off. Indeed, mortar of this kind 
 cannot be removed, when once set, except by weak acid purposely 
 applied. I found a brush, like a paste-brush or flat vamish-brush, 
 about an inch -^dde, was the best instrument for appljdng the 
 mortar, which last ought to be in a rather more liquid state than 
 that in which it is used in bricklayer's work. The whiteness of the 
 mortar could easily be corrected by dusting the work over with a 
 little soot or lampblack, after the operation is completed. The best 
 way is to turn the glass upon the easel, so that the outside of it 
 
46 BIOGEAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 is next you, to which, in preference to the painted side, the dirt 
 should be applied. 
 
 This dirtying is of little use unless the material itself resembles 
 the old in texture. When it does, I cannot tell the old from the 
 new, the imitation of "la patina" being so exact. Any window 
 that is intended to be far from the eye would be improved by a 
 slight application, used with judgment and with an artistic eye. 
 
 Here endeth the chapter on Dirt. You will understand I advo- 
 cate its use with great caution and art, so as to improve what is 
 already good in colour, tone, and drawing, not as a substitute for all 
 or any of these things, as some of our glasswrights employ it. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 C. WiNSTOX. 
 
 XXIII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, 
 
 Since my return home I have been too much engaged to 
 write until now. The practice to which you allude of touching up 
 painted windows, after they are leaded up, with a colour which is 
 not fixed to the glass by burning, and which must fall off as soon as 
 the vehicle with' which it is mixed loses its tenacity, as it must be 
 expected to do within a few years, is one unfortunately too common 
 in this country. It is very rarely that one does not detect the 
 practice, in any groups of figures at least. When I was Associate 
 Juror in the 1851 Exhibition, it fell to my lot to examine very 
 carefully all the glass-paintings in the gallery, and I found that 
 the practice I have mentioned was not confined to the English, 
 but very largely indulged in by the French glass-painters ; but I 
 failed to detect it in any of the German glass-paintings, which 
 seemed on the whole to be more conscientiously executed than any 
 of the others. You may always detect it by throwing the light upon 
 the surface of the glass-painting ; you will then see that the touching 
 up is of a different colour from the enamel, and of course it can be 
 easily scraped ofi". It will last, according to the vehicle Avith which 
 it is mixed : I dare say that turpentine would last from eighteen to 
 
 twenty years. Mr. touched up his three east windows in our 
 
 church here with common oil paint to give them solidity, which 
 peeled off in places in five or six years, and last year it was so bad 
 that the windows were this autumn painted over again at the back. 
 I think they look worse than they did ; but in two or three years 
 they will be uniform in appearance, owing to the peeling off of the 
 paint. 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 4/ 
 
 No glciss-painting which owes part of its effect to an application 
 of a fleeting nature can be regarded as a sound work. The applica- 
 tion of mortar stands on a different footing. This is used merely to 
 anticipate the effect of age and to give an artificial " patina," which, 
 when the real " patina " forms in other parts, can easily be removed. 
 
 I have seen the two new windows in the Temple Church, and 
 they are an excellent lesson. The material itself is perfect, and the 
 tone, and colour, and solidity, as good as the old. The design also 
 I like, though it could be improved, and the figure-drawing is far in 
 advance of that in the other windows ; and upon the whole, as a 
 mere antiquary, my experience of the Temple windows has made 
 me lean more to Munich than before. But, seriously speaking, 
 pray do not commit yourself in any way to anybody until you 
 have had further opportunity of looking at the glass at Wells and 
 Gloucester. 
 
 I do so much want to have a talk with you, and indeed I would 
 accompan}^ you to Wells ; at all events to Gloucester, and to Xew 
 College, Oxford. Believe me, we have not got to the bottom of this 
 subject yet. My notions have much expanded of late. 
 
 XXIV. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 2Gth December, 1857. 
 
 Many thanks for your note and the paper. You have con- 
 vinced me that I am wrong on one point, and that I have expressed 
 myself too carelessly on another. 
 
 First, when I said that I could not understand how fourteenth- 
 century ornament could be made to harmonize with Hubner's figures, 
 I quite forgot what you say, that it could be adapted so as to har- 
 monize ; in which I quite agree. I had in ni}' mind, at the time I 
 wrote, onl}" the fourteenth-century ornament, as it exists, in all its 
 stiffness, flatness, and simplicity, and only thought of two st^des 
 joining, as any two styles would, if employed without modifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Secondly, I did not for one moment mean, however I may have 
 expressed myself, to recommend Nicholas Pisano's style as a model, 
 except for its sentiment, and for those points in respect of which 
 you accept it. What I did mean was this ; it is that shallow 
 pedantic antiquarianism which constitutes the gi'eat stumbling- 
 block ; and the subtle way of going to work is, I think, to turn their 
 flank, rather than attack their position too openh'. Now the style 
 of drapery which is always associated with fourteenth-century work 
 is a severe close style like that of the Greeks, and not a voluminous 
 style like that of Raphael and the men of the sixteenth century 
 generally ; and it was to show what was the exact style of draper^" 
 
48 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 that actually was used in the fourteenth centniy, that I alluded io 
 Nicholas Pisano, not for the purpose of copying him, but in order 
 that the Germans might see the type of drapery that antiquaries 
 would admire, and be in perfect harmony with the architecture, and 
 thus be able to select out of the numerous styles of good drapery 
 one that came nearest, in its general character, to that of N. Pisano's. 
 By this means they might satisfy every artistic requirement, and 
 yet at the same time produce a style of drapery severe, close, and 
 of thin texture (though not so thin as the real Greek, which har- 
 monizes most with the architecture of the thirteenth century), 
 which in its general contour would so completely resemble the 
 general effect of N. Pi.sano's as would silence all crotchety cavillers. 
 The two most rascally sketches on the other side, the one Greek, the 
 other Eaphael, will show you what I mean. 
 
 Compare them with any print of Nicholas Pisano's, and you will 
 see exactly what I mean. There is a great deal of sixteenth-century 
 drapery that would do better than Greek, as being more natural ; 
 but I am aware that to an artist this needs only to be hinted to be 
 understood. All I fear is, that if the Germans' attention is not 
 called to the ordinary type of the fourteenth-century drapery, they 
 will adopt something that will be too wide from it, and so give the 
 enemies of art cause to blaspheme. If you could see some photo- 
 graphs of Decorated sculptured figures, this would even be better 
 than a print of N. Pisano's. 
 
 Yours most truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXV. 
 
 My dear Wilson', Rliyl, Flintshire, 24tli March, ]8G0. 
 
 I found your letter and Sir A. Alison's opinion (whereat m}^ 
 soul receiveth comfort) on my return here from, I think, the worst 
 expedition in respect of rain, wind, and snow amongst the mountains 
 that has ever fallen to the lot of man to endure since Hannibal passed 
 the Alps. The only compensation was the magnitude of the water- 
 falls, some of which were really splendid. I hope to be back in 
 London on Thursday next, when I will address myself to the devout 
 meditation of your lecture. 
 
 I am afraid what you say is too true as to the influence of easel- 
 painting on glass-painting, and the taste for pretty effects instead of 
 great and broad ones. But I do not quite follow you in your argument 
 about monumental art. No doubt you are perfectly right in saying 
 that the old glass-painters did not scribble about principles, nor did 
 any old artists. They did the thing, and left it to smaller folks to 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 49 
 
 discourse — often very absurdly — about the principles, or supposed 
 principles, upon which they acted. 
 
 After the thirteenth century (the medallion era) I believe that all the 
 old glass-painters were as wrong on principle as the poor Cinquecento 
 glass-painters who have been so abused. The only difference between 
 them was this, — the old fellows stuck their saints under niches, 
 or backed by a landscape, into the holes provided for them by the 
 tracery, and cared little if figures cheek-by-jowl were drawn to 
 different scales. All they seem to have thought about was, how to 
 fill a large space or a small one in precisely the same manner. The 
 " monumental flatness," as I have heard it called, of their works was 
 but the result of ignorance of the method of representing light and 
 shade ; in which respect their works bear the same analogy to those 
 of the Cinquecento artists, as the contemporary oil-paintings bear to 
 what Vasari calls the " new manner." 
 
 The Cinquecento practice of disregarding mullions, (fee, arose from an 
 artistic rebellion against the fetters of medisevalism. Glass-paintings 
 did not cease to be glass-paintings until the " new manner " in oils 
 was so imbibed by the glass-painters that they strove to over-finish 
 and to imitate the effect of oil ; in which they necessarily failed. Sir 
 Joshua Keynolds's and West's works perpetuated the error in exe- 
 cution — I mean technical execution ; grand and monumental as their 
 designs are, they are not glass-paintings of so high an order as the 
 productions of the Cinquecento, or even early sixteenth-century 
 
 Gothic school 
 
 Yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXVL 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 22nd Sept. 1861. 
 
 After twenty-four hours' rumination, I have the more com- 
 pletely settled down into an opinion that glass-painting has been 
 more effectually raised from the mire, and set alongside of and on 
 an equality with the sister arts, by what has been done at Glasgow, 
 than by anything else that 1 have yet seen in Europe. Had Am- 
 miiller been allowed to go on in his own old way, colouring the 
 glass with enamel colours, and laying the high lights down with 
 enamel, you would have had works beautiful, no doubt, in so far as 
 good drawing and excellent composition could have secured beauty, 
 but which would have tended to an effect entirely at variance with 
 the intention of the builders of the cathedral, since they would have 
 converted the window-openings into, apparently, panels of solid 
 wall, painted in fresco— an effect which is actually produced in 
 the church of St. Germain I'Auxerrois at Paris, the windows of 
 
 E 
 
50 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 which have been executed by M. Marechal, of Metz, in the ordinary 
 " German manner." But by yonr insisting upon the nse of coloured 
 (pot-metal) glass, as the colouring matter, and only allowing of 
 •enamel-paint as shadow, and, above all, by retaining clear high 
 lights, works have been obtained which are not likely ever to be 
 mistaken for anything else than painted glass windows. And in 
 this respect the men of Glasgow have read the world a lesson, for 
 which they are entitled to the consideration and gratitude of every 
 one learned enough to appreciate the additional beauty imparted 
 to any sort of decoration by mere force of its having been exe- 
 cuted in conformity with its own peculiar mechanical and intrinsic 
 conditions. 
 
 I have been so accustomed, until now, to see all such modern 
 glass-paintings as have the least title to be called works of art 
 executed on a principle entirely opposed to a due display of the 
 most beautiful of the essential properties of glass, namely, its trans- 
 lucency, that perhaps I may have hardly done justice to the artistic 
 drawing and composition of the Glasgow windows — considered as 
 mere designs — in my admiration of them as glass-paintings. Yet I 
 am sufficiently impressed with a sense of their artistic merits to enable 
 me to express a conviction that, considering each one as a whole, 
 that is, as an artistic glass-painting, and comparing it with one of 
 the best ancient examples, the balance of excellence does remain 
 with the modern German window. This conclusion was, I admit, 
 wholly unexpected, and was, as it were, forced upon me by my ten 
 hours' continuous and laborious scrutiny of the glass in the cathedral. 
 And therefore, to prove to myself that I am not dreaming, I am 
 writing down the steps which led to my conversion, a process 
 which may perhaps not be without some practical use, if it should 
 show in what respects I venture to think that even these windows 
 are susceptible of improvement. 
 
 As the glass-paintings which most resemble these in artistic merit 
 and refinement are the Cinquecento, and as the Lichfield glass is the 
 finest Cinquecento example that I am acquainted with, and more- 
 over is that with which 1 am most familiar, and of which my 
 memory is the strongest, I having so recently studied it, I make my 
 comparison between the Lichfield glass and the Glasgow. It must 
 be admitted, of course, that, in point of tone and richness of colour, 
 the Lichfield glass is superior, in a very high degree, to the 
 Glasgow. This superiority is principally owing to the constitution 
 of the ancient material ; and it will therefore continue to exist until 
 the moderns have learned the art of making glass identical in its 
 chemical constituents and mechanical formation with that of the 
 middle of the sixteenth century. And this can be done only by 
 continuing the chemical analyses initiated by my friends here, and 
 working them out synthetically, as I recommended to Ainmiiller. 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 51 
 
 'Whether the use of glass identical with the old in texture would 
 be compatible Avith that excessive delicacy of pictorial manipu- 
 lation which is so channing in the Glasgow windows, is perhaps 
 doubtful. I incline to think that it would be incompatible ; but 
 of this I feel perisuaded, that any loss in delicacy of execution would 
 be more than compensated by an increase of power in general effect ; 
 and therefore I do not hesitate to recommend the pressing upon 
 Ainmiiller the necessity of an improved material : the rather, because 
 it is clear that nothing will conduce more to the popularity of 
 artistical glass-painting than the introduction of tone and richness of 
 colour. It is the effect of their colour which makes old windows so 
 prized by the most learned and the most ignorant alike, and causes 
 the latter to be easily blinded to the defects of modern glass-painting, 
 provided that, by means of scumbling and other unlawful expedients, 
 the glass is somcNvhat toned down from its original fierceness. I 
 have no sort of doubt that, if the Glasgow windows were smeared 
 over with brown paint and wax, to their ruin as works of art, they 
 would gain in the estimation of ninety-nine out of every hundred 
 spectators, from some of whom we might reasonably expect better 
 judgment ; but this shows how important an ingredient in glass- 
 painting is colour of a fine rich subdued tone, and how foolish it 
 Ls for great artists to neglect taking the only practical steps for 
 obtaining it. But however one may regret, on looking at the Glas- 
 gow windows, the absence of colour in a low key, such as one sees 
 in the Lichfield glass, there is no denying that, regaided as har- 
 monies of colours in a high key, these windows are unrivalled : and, 
 whether it is owing to my sense of colour being more shrewdly 
 tickled by a perfect harmony of colour in a high key than in a low 
 one, — or whatever else the cause may be, — I confess I was more 
 pleasurably affected by the harmonies of the lighter colours in some 
 of these windows, than 1 ever remember myself to have been by 
 those of the old ones. I allude particularly to the landscape back- 
 grounds in Strahuber's windows for Mr. Stirling of Keir, in the 
 choir, and in his window in the nave, for Lord Home. This 
 shows, therefore, that a high key of colour has its beauties, though 
 they may refuse to exhibit themselves except upon the persuasion 
 of those who are capable of feeling them keenly. It would be 
 wrong, therefore, to say that these windows, like the generality of 
 modern ones, are wholly inferior to the old ones in point of colour. 
 Upon the whole they are, I think, inferior; but they are only 
 inferior upon the balance ; they have, in the stronger colours, defects 
 such as one deplores, and in the lighter colours excellences such 
 as I have never seen in ancient glass. The defectiveness of the 
 stronger colours could not, I think, be wholly removed without 
 injuiy to the lighter colours ; because it would necessitate a change 
 of key. And it may be a question how far it may be desirable to 
 
 E 2 
 
52 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 effect an alteration of key, though my own feeling is certainly 
 in favour of an alteration into a lower key, thinking that more 
 would, on the whole, be gained than lost by the change. But this I 
 can safely recommend, — the qualification of the stronger colouis, 
 such as green and red and blue, these in their order, without any 
 change of key, by the simple expedient of diapering them, whether 
 used in draperies or in plain grounds. 
 
 But whatever opinion we may hold in respect of the inferiority of 
 the new to the old glass in colour, there can be no doubt that, in 
 every other respect, the superiority is entirely on the side of the new. 
 Hess's prophets are immeasurably finer than anything that has yet 
 been seen in old glass. There is nothing in old glass to surpass any 
 of Strahuber's compositions; and though some of the designs in 
 the Lichfield glass may, in composition, be superior to those of the 
 least successful of the designs at Glasgow, still, in execution^ the 
 Glasgow designs are superior. In all of the Lichfield glass there is 
 a certain coarseness and carelessness of execution which would con- 
 trast unfavourably with the care, and finish, and delicacy displayed 
 in the Glasgow windows. The old style, though wonderfully 
 effective, is a rough-and-ready style after all. They were dexterous 
 manipulators, rather than accomplished artists. And I should not 
 hesitate to say that in every instance the designs (many of which 
 were evidently the work of very great artists) have suffered in the 
 execution upon the glass. This 1 do not think can be generally said 
 of the Glasgow glass. Here and there, no doubt, there is a timidity 
 of execution ; but I am sure that, if the least successful were com- 
 pared with the best of the Lichfield windows, it would be seen that 
 correctness of drawing was entirel}^ on the side of the moderns. 
 Indeed, so convinced am I of the superiority of the German glass 
 over the old, in technical excellence of every kind, and in compo- 
 sition and drawing generally, and in effects of broken colour, that 
 upon the whole I cannot withhold the palm from the former : it 
 must be considered to be an improvement upon old glass. 
 
 Of course, as an antiquary, I could easily pick holes in many 
 things, especially in the heraldry. It was also impossible not to see, 
 when one looked for it, that the general character of the draperies 
 was that of the sixteenth century, whilst that of the ornament was 
 of the fourteenth. But the anachronism was so disguised by the 
 similarity of execution — the same amount of shadow and finish 
 having been given to the ornament as to the figures — that it ceased 
 to be offensive, or even noticeable at first sight. 1 think a wise dis- 
 cretion was exercised in selecting the general style of ornament 
 from that of the fourteenth century ; but this has been sufficiently 
 modified not to contrast with the figures, whilst it remains suf- 
 ficiently like that of the early part of the fourteenth, or end of the 
 thirteenth century, not to disagree with the architectural details of 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 53 
 
 the building. If I was asked to say what I thought was the style of 
 the painted glass, I should answer that it was in the style of the nine- 
 teenth century, modified to suit the character of a building of the 
 reign of Edward L, and this I believe to be the absolute truth. The 
 windows sufficiently agree with the character of the building, 
 without being so rigidly archaic as to exclude the improvements of 
 modern art ; and I think that it would have been mere pedantry 
 to have insisted on a more cordial agreement between the glass and 
 the architecture. Indeed, a perfect conformity between the styles 
 of the two would have been absolutely impossible, unless the donors 
 of the windows would have agreed to forego their heraldr}^ — the 
 clergy, their choice of subjects, — the people, writing such as they 
 could read, — the artists, their art; — in fine, unless everything had 
 been given up which makes these windows worth having. Another, 
 and of itself a complete bar to perfect conformity between the glass 
 and the architecture, would have been the difference that exists 
 between the material, as now made, and that used in the thirteenth 
 or fourteenth centuries. This consideration may seem to some to be 
 frivolous. All I know is, that to the true antiquary a consideration 
 of the nature of the material is as inseparably connected with an 
 investigation of the date of a painted window, as a consideration of 
 its heraldry, its lettering, its art, can possibly be. Unless there is a 
 perfect agreement in all these things, he must be a poor antiquary 
 indeed who cannot pronounce the work, without hesitation, to be 
 spurious. As, therefore, an exact conformity was, in the nature of 
 things, impossible, a latitude such as that which has enabled the 
 artists to make the windows such as they are — real works of fine 
 art in painted glass — was most properly permitted. 
 
 Believe me most truly yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXVII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Rl^yl' FlintsLire, IGth Oct. 186L 
 
 You have indeed done good service 
 
 I have written a letter of chemical details of fourteen pages to 
 Ainmliller, and have sent also a box of specimens to him, on the old 
 principle of seeing is believing. But before entering on this matter 
 I wrote as follows -.—Allow me to express the very gTcat pleasure 
 received from examining last month the magnificent windows of 
 Glasgow Cathedral, which have been executed by your establish- 
 ment. I am well acquainted with most of the glass-paintings which 
 have been, during several years past, executed under your direction 
 for various places, including those at the Maria Hilf Church at Municli, 
 
54 BIOGEAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 at Cologne Cathedral, and at Peterhonse College, Cambridge. But 
 the glass-paintings at Glasgow do, in my opinion, surpass them all, 
 as works in painted glass. I say emphatically — as works in painted 
 glass; because the employment by your establishment of artists 
 enjoying a European reputation, to make the cartoons, has always 
 ensured to your works an artistic excellence, which favourably dis- 
 tinguishes them from all other, modern and even ancient. But it is in 
 respect of the great superiority as glass-painting over all others, that 
 I particularly refer to the windows of Glasgow Cathedral. I ven- 
 ture to attribute this superiority to your having executed them 
 according to the method pursued in the ancient glass-paintings of 
 the best period, that is between 1505 and 1550, in which no enamel 
 colours are used except for outlines and shadow. By this means 
 you have imparted to these works a peculiar brilliancy and delicacy 
 which characterise them as glass-paintings, and effectually distin- 
 guish them from paintings on opaque surfaces, such as paintings in 
 oil and fresco. And 1 cannot but think that it is partly on account 
 of the idea, which their pellucid appearance forces upon the mind, 
 that they are glass-paintings, and nothing else,— partly on account 
 of the manipulation of the paintings not having been too highly 
 elaborated, — that it happens that the lead-work (verbleiung) and 
 the iron bars or arming of these windows are found to be no dis- 
 figurement to the pictures. On the contrary, the effect of the glass- 
 painting is actually improved by these appendages ; which, — how- 
 ever out of place and disagreeable they may seem in a glass-painting 
 which resembles oil or fresco painting in the elaboration of its execu- 
 tion, — are yet recognized as necessary and essential to what is shown 
 undisguisedly to be nothing else than a glass-window. It is true 
 that I have seen paintings upon glass, both from your establishment, 
 and from Dresden, Brussels, Metz, and particularly Milan, that are 
 more exquisitely finished, and (by means of enamels) more delicately 
 and variously coloured, than these windows of Glasgow Cathedral; 
 but I always observed that in proportion as in this respect they 
 approached the effect of paintings upon canvas, in fresco, or on 
 china, so did they lose brilliancy and pellucidness, and the less did 
 their general chaiacter appear to harmonize with the harsh black 
 lines of the lead-work and iron bars ; which, therefore, in a pro- 
 portionate degree, struck me as being blemishes in the picture. 
 
 This is why I prefer the Glasgow windows so greatly to amy 
 others of modern times : indeed, considered as glass-painting, they 
 appear to me to touch perfection. I perceived in them all how 
 deeply the ancient glass-paintings had been studied ; how, whilst 
 adopting the ancient method, you had improved upon it, as, for 
 instance, by using a blue enamel to shade upon purple-coloured 
 glass, a purple enamel to shade upon blue-coloured glass, instead 
 uf uniformly employing a biown enamel for the purpose of 
 shading ; and I also observed in some of the windows effects 
 
Apf. LETTEES to MR. C. H. WILSON. 00 
 
 of landscape such as I have certainly never seen equalled in any 
 ancient glass-painting. 1 allude particularly to the landscape in 
 a window executed from a design by Strahiiber for Mr. Stirling of 
 Keir, in which the landscape was rosy and full of sunshine, and 
 yet perfectly preserved its distance. A similar etiect was also 
 observable in another window from a design by the same artist for 
 the Earl of Home. And I most highly admired the simple manner 
 in which these beautiful eifects were produced, as being so entirely 
 in accordance with the principle of true glass-painting. 
 
 It is unnecessary for me to say anything in praise of the pictures 
 themselves — the excellent drawing and arrangement of the groups, 
 the dignity of the single figures, the draperies so well suited in 
 their manner for painted glass, &c. — for excellence of this kind was 
 ensured by your having had recourse for the cartoons to such artists 
 as Professor Von Hess, Straliiiber, Von Schwinde, &c. ; but I cannot 
 omit again to express my extreme satisfaction at everything con- 
 nected with these windows which was the especial woik of your 
 establishment, such as the harmony of the colouring and the breadth 
 of the effect ; and it gives me great pleasure to be able to say that 
 the window which seemed to be most agreeable in respect of orna- 
 mentation was the one which was executed from your own designs 
 for Mr. Walter Stirling. 1 have no hesitation in declaring that, in 
 my humble opinion, when we consider the high art displayed in 
 the figures, and the skill shown in the execution of the^e windows 
 as glass-paintings, the windows of Glasgow Cathedral ai'e absolutely 
 unrivalled. No modem work approaches them, and upon the whole 
 they are certainly superior to any ancient work. 
 
 There is one thing, however; that I notice in these windows 
 which now biings me to the consideration of your letter of the 
 18th August. 
 
 Each of your windows is as perfect a harmony of colour as the 
 finest old window can be pronounced to be; but the difference is 
 that in your windows the harmon}^ is in a high key of colour, whilst 
 in the old windows the harmony is in a low key of colour. Now, a 
 harmony in a low key of colour is undoubtedly more agreeable than 
 a harmony in a high key, and so thought that prince of colourists 
 Titian ; for it is remarkable that all his blues, greens, yellows, reds, 
 and indeed all other hues, are low in tone, and are by no means 
 pure colours. You should, therefore, endeavour to prevail upon your 
 glass-maker to furnish your establishment with glass of a lower tone 
 of colour than that which has been used in the Glasgow windows, 
 especially with green glass, blue glass, and red glass of a lower 
 tone ; these being the three colours, and particularly the two first 
 named, which most struck me as being too high in key in the 
 
 Glasgow windows 
 
 [The remainder of this letter is wanting.] 
 
56 BIOGKAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 XXVIII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, Sth April, 1862. 
 
 I am delighted to think that you are able to attack the clear- 
 story, the windows of which I specially remember, for it is the most 
 elegant row of clearstory windows that I know of. 
 
 When you speak of a dark effect there, you have Bourges in your 
 mind. But I question whether, considering the difference between 
 the lower glass and that at Bourges, you would not get a more 
 striking effect by making the general fond of these windows a 
 white pattern very like that of the west window. Of these patterns 
 there is a great abundance in Germany. Cologne Cathedral, for 
 instance, is full of them, so are Strasburg, Freyburg, &c. ; and it is 
 true that the practice of the fourteenth century was, I think 1 may 
 say universally, in favour of white patterns, with, or without, the 
 insertion of figures and canopies, heraldry, &c., for clearstory win- 
 dows. Even in the thirteenth century, the leaning was in favour 
 of white patterns ; but this may have been from economical prin- 
 ciples in both centuries. Certainly the work was more scamped in 
 the fourteenth century than the thirteenth. Bourges, Canterbury, 
 and Tours, so far as it goes, have all dark clearstories ; but the 
 later cathedrals of the thirteenth century have white patterns in 
 their clearstories — Salisbury for instance, Lincoln, and all the 
 transitional ones, as well as those in the " Decorated "style. Exeter 
 Cathedral is a good specimen of the partly ornamental, partly pic- 
 torial treatment. So is Gloucester. You might if you liked have a 
 single figuie, without a canopy, on an ornamental quarry-ground, in 
 eacli light. A row of splotches of colour along the bottoms of the 
 windows, with grisaille above, would tell wonderfully, and quite 
 carry the idea, suggested by the west window, upwards. 
 
 Most truly yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXIX. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 23rd June, 1862. 
 
 I cannot but think that the green you mention is an arrow 
 from my quiver. For I most particularly called their attention to 
 the matter in my letters, and moreover sent them some fine old 
 specimens for imitation. A good olive can be made from sulphate 
 of iron ; but I forget whether I mentioned this. It all shows, how- 
 ever, that these Germans are doing their best, and that they are not 
 above taking a friendly hint. 
 
 You are perfectly right in letting people know who are the designers 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 57 
 
 of these windows. For if they had been designed by English artists 
 of equal or corresponding reputation, their veiy names would have 
 carried all before them. 
 
 There was an excellent article in the ' Times ' the other day, on 
 the French artists, and their works, not without bearing on the sub- 
 ject of glass-painting. The writer showed that the French artists 
 had more regard to fame, and less to pelf, than ours. So, no doubt, 
 have the Germans. Hence they will condescend to make designs 
 for painted glass, at moderate rates ; whereas ours will not, unless 
 they are paid at the same rate as if they were employed for a corre- 
 sponding time on paintings for Mr. Smith's or Mr. Robinson's back- 
 parlour. This, therefore, gives inferior men a monopoly of the 
 opportunities for lasting fame, and nobody ought, under these cir- 
 cumstances, to complain if those who are displeased with the per- 
 formances of these inferior men betake themselves to the more 
 liberal and congenial men of art in Germany 
 
 Yours most truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXX. 
 
 My dear ^^JLS0N, Temple, 18tli Jan. 18G3. 
 
 I saw j^esterday at Hughes's five of the lights intended for 
 Glasgow; four for the chapter-house and one for the crypt. I shall 
 be curious to know your opinion of them when they are up in their 
 place. 
 
 M}^ impression is that they will be valuable, as enabling a fair 
 comparison to be made between our modern glass and the German. 
 For they are the best that Hughes has yet done, and they are, I 
 think, superior to anything we saw in the late Exhibition, of 
 English performance. 
 
 In these lights you have the best of the modern material ; and 
 the depth of shade is as great as you would find at St. Gudule's. 
 Moreover the backgrounds, though they do not quite stick to the 
 figures, are yet flat enough to suit the most bigoted medisevalist. 
 The detail of the canopy-work is moreover unexceptionable; so 
 that you have the mediaeval idea " carried out " as the fashion is. 
 
 But does the thing accord better with the character of the ancient 
 architecture than the German windows ? This is the problem, which 
 I cannot but think these windows will solve. Speaking strictly as 
 an antiquary, I feel sure that I should say that they harmonized 
 with the ancient architecture not one bit more than what you have 
 already ; because I see in every direction a something which is not 
 at all like the old glass. The colours are all higher key, and there 
 
58 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR. App. 
 
 is a freedom in the drawing which wuuld not be found in any ancient 
 example. 
 
 Then, as matter of taste, what some people might consider 
 " deep and rich colouring" (and if these do not exhibit this, what 
 else would you haver) I consider heavy rather than deep, and. 
 violent rather than rich ; and the execution generally I should say 
 was heavy rather than powerful. Still they are the best of the sort 
 that I have yet seen. 
 
 Now the most powerful Cinquecento windows, like those at 
 Brussels, are not heavy. They have not the etherial eifect that the 
 German windows at Glasgow have ; but they are as unlike those of 
 Hughes's, as they are to Van Linge's. But I should be glad to hear 
 your impression, after you have compared them in general effect 
 
 with the German. is diligently working at the effect of his 
 
 windows, and I think successfully. The designs are gi'owing more 
 and more like those in St. Gudule's, both in power and vivacity. 
 There is nothing heavy about these, chiefly on account of the light 
 backgrounds and the white in the architecture. 
 
 Yours most truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXXI. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Rhyl, Fhntshire, 2t5th Oct. 1863 
 
 My paper on the Gloucester window is printed ; I expect a 
 copy in a few days, which i will forward to you, begging }our 
 acceptance of it. 
 
 The paper will really appear in the two next numbers of the 
 * Archasological Journal.' But, if it anyway tends to strengthen 
 your hands, you can use it as you like. The subject is treated 
 entirely from the archaeological point of view. In that view it is of 
 importance, fixing the date of that window, for it is like an anchor 
 in the sea of speculation. 
 
 Since then 1 have been engaged in an attempt to fix the date of 
 the glass in Nettlestead Church, in Kent, a chuich famous rather 
 for the remains of the heraldry in the windows, than for figuies or 
 works of art. Still this example will come well in with that of 
 Gloucester. As the paper will be shoiter than the Gloucester one, 
 I shall endeavour to make it the peg to hang some practical remarks 
 on ; and if 1 find the length will allow of this being done, 1 will 
 send you the MS. before it is printed ; for I do not feel steady except 
 in a matter purely archasological. 
 
 This glass at Nettlestead is of two dates; the earlier being of 
 the commencement of the reign of Plenry YI., and the later of the 
 
Afp. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 59 
 
 end of that reign. 1 hope, before I have done, to come to a date 
 more trustworthy than that aftbrded by analogy, which at present is 
 all that I can rely on. But it is curious to observe the wonderful 
 ditference between the glass material used in the Gloucester and 
 the Xettlestead windows, and the difference between the drawing, 
 shading, and general design of the two glass-paintings. The exe- 
 cution generally is more tender and refined in the Xettlestead than 
 in the Gloucester window, and the material used is more carefully 
 made, and more even in tint, than that at Glouce&ter. 
 
 This concurrent vaHation of the material and mode of execution 
 I have several times called attention to in the papers I have 
 written ; and you have made me see its importance more than I 
 had ever before seen it, by your remarks on the new manufacture in 
 relation to the Munich execution. 
 
 [The remainder of this letter is wanting. T'he intended memoir 
 on the Xettlestead glass was not wndtten.] 
 
 XXXII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 7th Dec. 1863. 
 
 Your note about the clearstory has only just (1*30 p.m.) come 
 to hand, as you had inadvertently directed to Xo. 4, instead of X'o. 3, 
 Harcourt Buildings. 
 
 I am altogether of the same opinion as yourself with regard to 
 the necessity of the enlargement of the figures in the clearstory. 
 This rule obtains, with the best effect, in the clearstories at 
 Bourges and Canterbury, and in the later clearstory at Exeter. 
 As a rule also, the clearstory figures should be slenderer in pro- 
 portion than those in the lower windows ; and you would do well 
 to divide the panel beneath the figure into three parts, for the 
 oval form which you have given will be still further elongated by 
 perspective. 
 
 Diapers in glass draperies should, I think, be used whenever they 
 can be used. The mistake the moderns make is the following an 
 abominable mediaeval practice of sticking pieces of other colours 
 into a drapery, for instance, of blue or red. This distracts the eye, 
 whereas diaper gives a sparkling lichness without detracting at all 
 from the breadth of the colouring ; and the bigger the figures the 
 greater necessity is there for diapers. 
 
 I also quite agree with you on the propriety of making these 
 figures and their accessories as little pictorial and as ornamental 
 as possible ; and in doing them, as you and Ainmiiller will agree to 
 do them, you will read a good lesson to the advocates of the " ironed- 
 out flat style." It will be quite worth while going again to Scot- 
 
60 BIOGEAPHICAL MEMOIR. Ait. 
 
 land, if you succeed, as I have no doubt you will, in making a series 
 of ornamental figures and accessories after an artistic fashion. It 
 
 was this that wished to see in the lower windows ; but I am 
 
 quite sure that he had not clear ideas on the subject well elaborated 
 and brought out. 
 
 In the clearstoiy at Augsburg Cathedral, the figures are richly 
 coloured on a white ground, diapered ; but, then, this ground has 
 that solid appearance which the glass of the twelftli century (of 
 which this is) alwaj^s has, owing to the presence of alumina in the 
 glass. But you might diaper your white, after a solemn fashion, 
 into a deep diaper, as at Exeter, at Canterbury, and Bourges, as you 
 know the whole thing is richly coloured, with the exception of the 
 canopies, which are wholly white and yellow. Ainmiiller's general 
 colouring is to my mind so good, and he is so alive to the value of 
 white as a fijil to the coloured glass, that, I fancy, you may with 
 safety let him go his own gait. 
 
 The more I think of it, the more I am sure that glass- 
 painting is in its infancy, even when we go to the best professors 
 extant. 
 
 Yours most truly, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
 XXXIII. 
 
 My dear Wilson, Temple, 15tL Jan, 1864. 
 
 It will do me a great deal of good to read what you write, so 
 pray send it. 
 
 In consequence of some very true remarks which you made after 
 I had written that paper on the Glasgow windows, which appeared 
 in the ' Illustrated Kews,' I have reconsidered the matter a good 
 deal, and the result of my cogitations 1 have committed to paper, 
 with the intent, after first submitting them to you, to append them 
 to the account I am engaged to write on the Nettlestead glass for the 
 Kent Arch93ological Societ}^ And the conclusion that (as at present 
 advised) I have come to is, that the whole of our misfortunes in 
 respect of modern glass-painting arise from a want of appreciating the 
 fact that, in these daj^s, any sort of art to be successful must be Euro- 
 pean. It will not do for us to disregard the comity of nations which 
 (as the Emperor Napoleon remarks) makes Europe but one country, 
 and set up for ourselves a standard of art reprobated by foreigners. 
 This is the chief objection to our media3val mania. In defiance of 
 modern improvements in building, — or rather in opposition to them, 
 as too suggestive of the enlightenment of the age, — we build churches 
 on the mediaival model, yielding however, in this, to nineteenth- 
 
App. letters to MR. C. H. WILSON. 61 
 
 century influence bv the addition of small details and refinements, 
 which have rendered the style essentially " Jemmy-Gothic." 
 
 The young architects may find this style, which has no rules, 
 a very convenient one as a cover to ignorance of proportion and 
 arrangement, and as saving a great deal of consideration and thought. 
 The result is sho^^^l in such a combination of crude extravagance as 
 we see in a new building in the Strand, which must bring dovra. 
 upon us tbe contempt of ever)" foreigner 
 
 In designing windows for mediaeval churches there are but two 
 courses which experience shows are available — either to adopt modera 
 aii (and this is the wise course -whenjigures are required), or else to 
 adopt mediaeval art ; and I am persuaded that this is only good advice 
 when the donors of the windows will be content with pattern- 
 work. 
 
 There is no third course, as I once supposed and advocated in 
 the article in the ' Illustrated News,' of getting a modification of 
 mediasvalism by good artists You entirely convinced me of my 
 error. The Glasgow windows, and also the Alnwick window (by 
 Dyce), are sufficient proofs that I was wrong and you were 
 right. 
 
 Therefore, Wilson, our course must be to inculcate upon the 
 donors of windows, — that, 1st. "Windows ought not to be caricatures 
 and offensive objects. 
 
 2nd. That when figures or groups are employed, this can be 
 avoided only by employing good artists, and that it will necessitate 
 the employment of a style which is not mediaeval. 
 
 3rd. That when figures or groups are not insisted on, the windows 
 may be made as much in " harmony *' with the style of the building 
 as is com2:)atible with our altered manufacture of glass ; and that 
 there are quantities of patterns that are excellent, and only require 
 an intelligent copj'ist to make them most agreeable ; and that, if 
 the ancient patterns are really and deeply studied, it will be found 
 that an inexhaustible store of new patterns may be devised, entirely 
 agreeing with them in spirit and character, and yet requiring no 
 greater skill than anj successful student at a School of Design 
 might reasonably be expected to possess ; though he would be the 
 last person to whom any reasonable being would intrust the design- 
 ing of a picture. 
 
 These are the last new lights that I have acquired in this most 
 interesting subject, and I shall (if you approve of them) " stick " to 
 them, as you say I have done (in your last most kind and welcome 
 letter, just come to hand, for which many thanks), through good 
 report or evil report. 
 
 In my «ofc opinion, I think that the Glasgow windows would have 
 been more successful if Ainmliller had been told to make all the 
 canopy-work like the German Gothic of the sixteenth century, — 
 
62 
 
 BIOaKAPHICAL MEMOIR. 
 
 App. 
 
 such as we see in Peter Fischer's shrine at Nuremberg, and in the 
 " stick and leaf" canopy-work in the cathedral at Munich. 
 
 This ornamentation, being broad, and its style little pronounced, 
 would have been in entire harmony with the figures. It is true 
 that our Gothicists would have complained, but to all other men 
 their objections would have in the end appeared untenable. 
 
 Most truly yours, 
 
 C. Winston. 
 
MEMOIRS ON GLASS-PAINTING, 
 
 A SHORT NOTICE OF THE PAIXTED GLASS IN 
 WINCHESTER AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD. 
 
 'Read for the writer by the Rev. J. L. Petit, ou the 13th of September, 1845, at 
 the Meeting of the Archaeological Institute at Winchester ; and then accom- 
 panied with fifteen drawings of Painted Glass.) 
 
 Figures of the Carpenter, the Mason, and the Clerk of the Works, from the East Win.low ^ 
 of the College Chapel. 
 
 T is perhaps hardly necessary to observe that an 
 original glass-painting, whatever may be its age, 
 possesses features characteristic of the period at 
 wliich it was executed : and this, whether the 
 work formed a coiDplete design of itself, or was 
 merely a repair, or an addition. But inasmuch 
 as it would be impossible, without the aid of 
 wuvnevovi^ finished drawings, and without vastly 
 the limits of such a paper as this, to point out, except 
 
 exceeding 
 
64 A SHORT NOTICE OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 ill very vague and general terms, the marks by which the date of a 
 glass-painting may be ascertained with tolerable exactness, I shall 
 not enter into the subject at present, but confine myself to a short 
 notice of the glass in the Cathedral, College, St. John's Church, 
 St. Cross, &c. I ought, however, to state that the peculiarities 
 in the design and execution of glass-paintings are as capable of 
 convenient classification as are architectural peculiarities ; and 
 that I shall refer to the three great mediaeval styles of glass- 
 painting by the terms Early English^ Decorated, and Perpen- 
 dicular, each style being nearly contemporaneous with the 
 synonymous style of architecture, as defined by Kickman, to 
 whose phraseology I think it advisable to adhere as much as 
 possible. The term Cinquecento I shall apply to any glass, prior 
 to the year 1550, which exhibits in its details the peculiar style 
 of ornament known by this name. 
 
 The earliest specimens of Early English glass that I have 
 met with in this neighbourhood are two fragments, probably of 
 a border, worked in with other glass, in the west window of the 
 nave of St. Cross ; and two other fragments, likewise of a border, 
 over the door leading into the refectory. All this glass is pre- 
 cisely of the same character, and I think early in the thirteenth 
 century. It doubtless came out of one of the Norman windows 
 of the church, and is all that I have been able to discover of the 
 original glazing. 
 
 A few small fragments of later Early English are at present 
 contained in two boxes in the cloisters of Winchester College, 
 which are filled with scraps, principally of glass of Wykeham's 
 time, brought from New College Chapel, Oxford. A few similar 
 fragments may be seen amongst other glass at St. Cross. This 
 glass is of the last half of the thirteenth century, and is similar 
 to that in Salisbury Cathedral. 
 
 Two circles of early Decorated glass are over the door of the 
 refectory of St. Cross, and two or three moi-e in the west window 
 of Winchester Cathedral. They are composed of mere plain 
 pieces of coloured glass disposed in a geometrical pattern, and 
 prove how much of the effect of early glass is owing to the 
 texture of the material. There are fragments of early Decorated 
 borders scattered about the windows of St. Cross. There is also 
 a piece of early Decorated ornament in one of the before-men- 
 tioned boxes ; and in the east window of the north aisle of 
 Komsey church, Hants, is an early Decorated panel, containing 
 a representation of Christ bearing the Cross. All this is, I think, 
 of the begnining of the fourteenth century. 
 
IN WINCHESTER AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD. 65 
 
 There are also specimens of later Decorated glass at St. Cross ; 
 in the boxes in the college, and in a tracery light of the north 
 window of De Lacy's work in the cathedral. 
 
 This neighbourhood is much richer in the early Perpendicular 
 than in any other glass. 
 
 The earliest specimen consists of the heads of two canopies in 
 the east window of the chancel of St, John's Church, Winchester, 
 in which it is hard to say whether the Decorated or the Perpen- 
 dicular features predominate. 
 
 The next in date is afforded by the remains of the original 
 glass in the west window of Winchester Cathedral, the west 
 windows of the aisles, and the first window in the south aisle, 
 counting from the west. No painted glass remains in the first 
 and second windows from the west in the north aisle. This 
 glass chiefly consists of the heads of canopies; in the west 
 window, however, two or three of the original figures remain. 
 It is undoubtedly the earliest Perpendicular glass in the cathe- 
 dral, and may be the work of Wykeham's predecessor. Bishop 
 Edington. 
 
 In Wykeham's will, dated rather more than a year before liis 
 death,^ he bequeaths a sum of money for the glazing of the 
 windows of the cathedral, beginning from the west end, at the 
 first windoiv of the new work done by him ; from which it would 
 appear that some windows at the western end of the edifice had 
 been already glazed. The character of the glass in the above- 
 mentioned windows, which I presume were glazed by Bishop 
 Edington, is, however, nearly identical with that in the east 
 windows of the ante-chapel of New College, Oxford, and with 
 most of that in the before-mentioned boxes, which I am informed 
 was taken from the west window of New College Chapel, 
 Oxford, at the time the window designed by Sir Joshua 
 Keynolds was put up. 
 
 The next in date in Winchester Cathedral is the glass in 
 the other windows of the aisles of the nave, and in the clear- 
 story windows of the nave. This is a little later than the glass 
 in the west window, and is of precisely the same character 
 as the original glass now remaining in the north, south, and 
 west windows of the ante-chapel of New College Chapel, Oxford. 
 According to Wykeham's will, these windows of the cathedral 
 were to be glazed in the following order. Those of the south 
 aisle and clearstory first, beginning from the west ; then those 
 
 Wykeham died Sept 24, 1404. 
 
6Q A SHORT NOTICE OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 of the north aisle and clearstory, also beginning from the west, 
 provided the money would go so far.^ Much more glass remains 
 on the north than on the south side of the cathedral ; but from 
 the existing fragments I cannot discover any perceptible differ- 
 ence between the glass on either side, whether in the drawing 
 or in the texture of the material. 
 
 Four figures, and parts of their canopies, belonging to this 
 glass, appear to have been removed into the first window from 
 the east of the clearstory of the choir. The head of the western- 
 most figure, a female, is as fine as anything that I have yet seen 
 in glass of this or any other period. 
 
 In the west window of the nave of St. Cross are many quarries 
 of this date, and the original part of the figures in the lower 
 part of the window is coeval with the quarries. The cross in 
 this window, which is embedded in the quarries, is modern, and 
 is made of sheet-copper. 
 
 The College Chapel was, it seems, originally glazed with glass 
 of the same date as that I have just been speaking of. 
 
 All the present glass in its side windows is, however, modern, 
 as well as all that in its east window, with the trifling exception 
 of some little bits in the tracery lights of the east window, con- 
 sisting of two small figures, the head of an angel, and four other 
 small fragments. 
 
 The original designs have been preserved in the modern glass 
 with considerable fidelity ; indeed, considering the time when it 
 was executed, about twenty years ago, it must be admitted to be 
 a vert/ good copy of the old. The art of making coloured glass 
 was not so well understood then as now: in particular the 
 manufacture of Kuby glass, like that of the fifteenth and six- 
 teenth centuries, w^as revived by the French only a few years 
 ago, and consequently long after these windows were painted. 
 The artist, therefore, worked under peculiar disadvantages; 
 nevertheless, had the old glass of the chapel been copied this 
 very year, however exactly, and wdth whatever care in the selec- 
 tion of the colours, the chapel windows would have been only 
 one degree better in appearance than they now are. They 
 would merely have exhibited the colouring of the sixteenth 
 century, instead of, as they now do, that of the nineteenth, united 
 with the drawing of the early part of the fifteenth century. For 
 the texture of all modern manufactured glass, uncoloured as well 
 as coloured, is identical only with that of the sixteenth century, 
 
 Lowth's ' Life of Wykeham/ p. 387. 
 
IX WIXCHESTER AND ITS XEIGHBOUEHOOD. 67 
 
 and is totally different from the texture of earlier glass. I can- 
 not too pointedly call attention to this fact, nor too earnestly- 
 express my decided opinion that, with the present materials, the 
 only glass which we can successfully imitate, and consequently 
 the only styles in which modern glass should under these 
 circumstances be painted, are those of the sixteenth century. In 
 all old glass the nature of the material varies as completely as the 
 character of the drawing and execution : indeed, the texture of 
 the glass affords of itself a criterion of its date. This principle 
 of adapting the execution to the material pervades all ancient, 
 and indeed all other manufactured work of original design ; and 
 it is in vain to imitate the drawing without also imitating the 
 material in which the work is to be executed. Hence it is that 
 modern encaustic tiles, whatever may be the date of the pattern 
 impressed upon them, always appear to be of the same date, viz. 
 that of the manufacture of the tile : and hence it also is, that 
 the best modern Early English and Decorated windows must 
 always fail to please a practised eye, not only on account of 
 their violation of the rules of style, but, what is a far gi^ater 
 objection in a work of art, on account of the total want of 
 harmony between the material and the 'mode in which it is 
 tvorhed. 
 
 To return, however, from this digression. The windows 
 in the chapel are still of great value, as giving the arrange- 
 ment, and to a considerable extent the drawing, of the original 
 work. 
 
 The next glass in order of date is in the heads of the three 
 westernmost windows, on the north side of the clearstory of the 
 choir in AYinchester Cathedral: it consists of canopy- work and 
 cherubim. The four figures in the upper tier of lower lights in 
 the easternmost of these three windows are of the same time, 
 and appear to be in their original position. The eight figures 
 and canopies in the upper tier of the two easternmost windows 
 on the south side of this clearstory are likewise of the same 
 date ; but these are all too short by six or ten inches for the 
 spaces they occupy, which would cause a suspicion of theii- 
 haviiio; been removed from some other windows. All this oflass 
 is, I think, of the close of Henr}' VI.'s reign. 
 
 There are fragments of glass of the same date as that last 
 noticed, scattered about the windows of St. John's Church, 
 Winchester. 
 
 The glass remaining in the east window of the north transept 
 of St. Cross is a little later. A better specimen of the border 
 
 F 2 
 
68 A SHORT NOTICE OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 which ornaments the glass in this window may be seen in 
 the east window of the chancel of St. Peter's Church, Cheesehill, 
 Winchester. 
 
 The glass of the east window of the College Library is of the 
 time of Edward IV., or early part of the reign of Henry VII., 
 and was removed some years ago to its present position from 
 the small chapel on the south side of the College Chapel, in 
 which the font now is. The glass is too narrow for the spaces 
 it occupies. 
 
 The arms in the windows of the Refectory at St. Cross, con- 
 sisting of those of Cardinal Beaufort, and a shield bearing the 
 livery colours of his family, are of the latter half of the fifteenth 
 century. The cardinal's arms are surmounted with his hat, and 
 surrounded with its pendent strings. The whole is on a quarry 
 ground, on which is repeated a motto, which I presume to be 
 the cardinal's. The words are " A Bono & Lyesse," written on 
 small scrolls.^ 
 
 The glass in the east window of the Choir of Winchester 
 Cathedral is perhaps a little earlier than 1525, and is the work 
 of Bishop Fox, whose arms, and motto, "Est deo gracia," are 
 introduced into it. 
 
 This window must, when perfect, have been a truly magni- 
 ficent one : it would be unfair to judge of it in its present state. 
 The only part of the glass now in its original position consists 
 (as I think) of the two figures which occupy the two southern- 
 most of the lower lights, and of that in all the tracery lights, 
 except the top central one and the three immediately below it. 
 The top central light is filled principally with some glass of 
 Wykeham's time, and all the rest of the window with glass 
 of Fox's time, removed from other windows. 
 
 This window, when compared with the surrounding ones, 
 exhibits most strikingly the characteristic features of the time. 
 It is superior to the other glass-paintings in the fulness and 
 arrangement of its colours, but it is less brilliant, owing to the 
 greater depth of the shading, to which the increased roundness 
 of the figures is owing. In point of execution^ I apprehend that 
 it is as nearly perfect as painted glass can be. In it the shadows 
 have attained their ]proper limit. Deeper shadows would have 
 produced blackness and opacity, and lighter shadows a greater 
 degree of flatness than is necessarily inherent in a real glass- 
 painting. This is the style which in my opinion ought to be 
 
 > A representation of these arms is given in the plate opposite. 
 
ARMS OF CARDINAL BEAUFORT. 
 
 rrom tie h-rfecMrv S: C.-cs- 
 
 TofacejMgv 6?. 
 
IN WINCHESTER AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD. 09 
 
 adopted at the present day, using the Cinquecento ornaments 
 when the glass is destined for a Eonian or Palladian building, 
 and Gothic details when the glass is, as here, designed for 
 a Gothic edifice. It was at this period that glass-painting 
 attained its highest perfection as an art. This circumstance 
 alone would be a sufficient reason, one would think, for adopting 
 the style of the first half of the sixteenth century in modern 
 works, in preference to the earlier and less perfect styles ; but 
 I have already pointed out a fatal objection to the adoption of 
 earlier styles — the impossibility of obtaining glass of the requisite 
 texture in which to execute works designed in any of the earlier 
 styles. 
 
 Bishop Fox's glass seems originally to have extended into 
 some of the side windows of the clearstory of the choir, the 
 heads of some of his canopies still retaining their original posi- 
 tions in these windows. The easternmost window on the north 
 side of this clearstory was evidently at one time filled with his 
 glass. The tracery lights still remain, and it is curious to 
 observe how their design and arrangement of colour are accom- 
 modated to the design and arrangement of colour of the earlier 
 glass in the other windows of this clearstory, and which I have 
 before said I believe to be of the latter part of the reign of 
 Henry YI. 
 
 Tlie aisle windows, both on the north and south sides of the 
 choir, also contain remains of Bishop Fox's glass. When perfect, 
 the glass in this part of the cathedral might have stood a com- 
 parison with the finest continental examples. 
 
 There is also some late glass, but much mutilated, in the east 
 window of the Lady-chapel of the cathedral ; and in one of the 
 east windows of the south transept are a few fragments of Cinque- 
 cento glass. 
 
 In the Library at the Deanery are some excellent specimens 
 of heraldic glass, of the time of James I. and Charles I., in 
 which, however, the decline of the art of glass-painting is very 
 apparent. 
 
 There are other detached portions of glass scattered about 
 Winchester, but I have described I believe the greater part, in 
 order to enable others to make out a series of glass of different 
 dates, to examine it, and judge for themselves, assuring them 
 that a careful investigation of existing specimens w^ill alone 
 enable them to acquire a critical knowledge of painted glass. 
 And as every little fragment of painted glass has its value in 
 the eyes of the student, however insignificant it may be in itself. 
 
70 
 
 NOTICE OF PAINTED GLASS IN WINCHESTEK, ETC. 
 
 I will again urge those who have painted glass in their posses- 
 sion carefully to preserve it. Time is perpetually destroying the 
 evidences of art, and his chief assistants are the negligence 
 and indifference of those who chance to possess specimens, 
 valuable only for the purpose of comparison with more perfect 
 works. 
 
 I cannot conclude without expressing my gratitude to the 
 Dean and Chapter of Winchester for their kindness in per- 
 mitting me free access to every part of the Cathedral ; and also 
 to the Warden of Winchester College, for allowing me to 
 examine the glass in the boxes in the cloister, and to copy such 
 parts of it as I thought proper. 
 
 Figure of the Glass-painter from the East Window of the College Chapel. 
 
n. 
 
 ON THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE CATHEDEAL 
 AND CHUKCHES OF YORK. 
 
 (From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archceological Institute at 
 York, July, 1846.) 
 
 OT many cities can boast of more extensive and 
 important remains of painted glass than York. 
 The examples extend over a period of nearly four 
 centm-ies, but it is the almost unbroken series of 
 glass-paintings of the fourteenth and fifteenth 
 centuries which renders this collection so interest- 
 ing to the student. 
 
 The greater portion of these specimens is in 
 the Minster, and their value as evidences of the state of the 
 art at different periods has been enhanced by Mr. Browne's 
 laborious investigation of a vast mass of original documents 
 relating to the building and adorning of the cathedral, which 
 has enabled him to assign dates to most of the windows with 
 considerable precision. 
 
 It is not my intention to enter into any detailed statement 
 concerning these windows, but simply to point out, as nearly as 
 I can, tlie order in which they should be examined ; leaving it 
 to the student to ascertain the difference of style observable in 
 these works, and referring him for particular dates to Browne's 
 * History of York Cathedral.' Mr. Browne's excellent notes on 
 the painted glass in the Parish Churches, which are in the 
 hands of the members of the Institute, render it unnecessary for 
 me to offer many observations on this subject. 
 
 The earliest painted glass in this city, and indeed one of the 
 earliest specimens that I am acquainted with in England, is 
 a portion of a Jesse in the second window from the west, on the 
 north side of the clearstory of the nave, of the cathedral. It 
 forms the upper subject in the westernmost lower light of this 
 wdndow. The date of the glass is about 1200 ; it is therefore 
 much older than the greater part of the Early English glass at 
 
72 ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 Canterbury Cathedral, to wliicli I do not think a date can be 
 assigned much earlier than the middle of the thirteenth century. 
 A coloured engraving of this very curious example is given in 
 Browne's 'History of York Cathedral/ plate 123. Much Early 
 English glass, varying in date from the beginning to the middle 
 of the thirteenth century, has been employed to fill the wheel of 
 tracery in the head of the last-mentioned window, as well as the 
 wheels in the tracery of the five next clearstory windows. The 
 upper tier of subjects in the lower lights of the fifth and seventh 
 windows, counting from the west, on the north side of this clear- 
 story, are also Early English, An Early English subject is 
 inserted in one of the lower lights of the sixth clearstory window, 
 counting from the west. The wheels in the tracery of all but 
 three of the clearstory windows, on the south side of the nave, 
 are likewise filled with Early English glass ; and Early English 
 glass-paintings are also to be found amongst the subjects in 
 their lower lights. Coloured engravings of some of this glass 
 are given in Browne's ' History of York Cathedral ; ' one 
 plate — of great value to the antiquary — represents a series of 
 borders, from the commencement to the middle of the thir- 
 teenth century. 
 
 The next glass in order of date is that in the Five Sisters : 
 which beautiful pattern-windows are of the latter half of the 
 thirteenth century. It is hardly necessary to observe that the 
 glazing of the five lancets above the Sisters is modern. A por- 
 tion of the pattern of each of the iFive Sisters has been carefully 
 engraved in Browne's 'York,' plates 61, 63, 65, 67, and 69. 
 Some glass of the same character and date as that in the Five 
 Sisters has been inserted in the tracery of the second window, 
 from the door, in the vestibule or passage leading into the 
 chapter-house. The remains of a very nice Early English win- 
 dow of the latter half of the thirteenth century are inserted in 
 two Decorated windows on the north side of St. Dennis or 
 Dionis Church, Walmgate, in this city. 
 
 The next glass in order of date is that in the chapter-house 
 and vestibule leading into it. This is of the time of Edward II., 
 and commencement of the reign of Edward III., and is an 
 extremely beautiful specimen of early Decorated work. Accurate 
 engravings of the patterns of some of these windows are given 
 in Browne's ' York,' plates 79, 83, 85, 88, and 92 ; and a coloured 
 print of one of the subjects, the Annunciation, has lately been 
 published in this city. One window in the chapter-house, that 
 opposite the entrance, is a restoration by Messrs. Barnett and 
 
IN THE CATHEDRAL AND CHURCHES OF YORK. 73 
 
 Sons, of York ; it lias been carefully executed, and if it does not 
 produce so satisfactory an effect as the original windows, this 
 arises not from the fault of the artist, but from the impossibility 
 of procuring, at the present day, a material similar in texture to 
 the glass of the fourteenth century. 
 
 The next glass in order of date is that in the nave of the 
 cathedral, its clearstory, and aisles. This glass is all of the time 
 of Edward III. The contract for glazing the great west window 
 is dated 1330, and none of the glass probably is later than 1350. 
 The general arrangement and execution of the designs through- 
 out this part of the building are well worthy of notice, as evincing 
 the attention paid by our ancestors to general effects in these 
 matters. The west windows of the nave and aisles, of which 
 distant views may be obtained, have their lower lights filled 
 with large figures and canopies ; while the windows of the aisles, 
 with but one exception, are adorned with paintings of a more 
 complicated character, and on a smaller scale, and which are 
 therefore better calculated for a near inspection. Much of the 
 plain geometrical glazing in the clearstory windows is original, 
 and, like that in a similar position in Cologne Cathedral, affords 
 a proof that the ancient glass-painters did not consider them- 
 selves hound to finisli 'patterns destmed to occupy a distant 
 position as highly as those placed nearer the eye. Some 
 Decorated glass of the same character and date as that in the 
 nave has been placed in the first window from the west of 
 the south aisle of the choir. The second and third clearstory 
 windows from the east, on the south side of the choir, contain 
 similar glass, which, as I conjecture, has been removed thither 
 from one or other of the two blank side windows of the north 
 and south aisles of the nave. Many of the churches in the town 
 possess good Decorated glass in their windows ; I may mention 
 in particular the east window of the north aisle of All Saints', 
 North-street, and the westernmost window of the north aisle 
 of St. Martin' s-cum-Gregory : there are also the remains of a 
 Decorated Jesse, like that in one of the windows of the south 
 aisle of the nave of the Cathedral, in St. Dennis or Dionis 
 Church; and some very perfect Decorated designs in the first 
 and second windows from the east on the north side of that 
 building. 
 
 The earliest Perpendicular glass in the Cathedral is contained 
 in the third window from the east in the south aisle of the 
 choir, in the third and fourth windows from the east in 
 the north clearstory of the choir, and in the fourth clearstory 
 
74 ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 window from the east on the opposite side of the choir. These 
 windows are of the close of the fourteenth century. There is 
 also an early Perpendicular Jesse in the third window from the 
 west in the south aisle of the choir. The date of the east win- 
 dow of the choir is well known ; a contract for glazing it in 
 three years was made in 1404. This window is one of the best 
 executed that I have ever seen ; the beauty of the figures, how- 
 ever, cannot be fully appreciated without inspecting them closely 
 from the gallery near the window. The other windows of the 
 choir aisles, eastward of the small eastern transepts, as well as 
 the glass in the lancet windows on the east side of the great 
 western transepts, appear to be likewise of the time of Henry 
 IV. Some of these windows may probably be a few years earlier 
 than the east window. All the rest of the glass in the choir is 
 of the reigns of Henry V. and Henry VI. ; the greater portion 
 belonging to the latter reign. The chief peculiarity that I have 
 observed in these windows is, that the white glass, which enters 
 so largely into their composition, is, generally speaking, less 
 green in tint than is usual, especially in the western and 
 southern parts of England. Mr. Browne has informed me that 
 it clearly appears, from the fabric rolls, that this white glass is of 
 English manufacture, which circumstance may perhaps serve to 
 account for its whiteness. There is some very good glass of the 
 time of Henry VI. in the east and other windows of All Saints' 
 Church, North-street; the east window unfortunately has not 
 been improved by the modern restorations, which appear to have 
 been made in ignorance of the fundamental principles of the 
 Perpendicular style of glass-painting. St. Martin's Church, 
 Coney-street, contains much painted glass of the time of 
 Henry VI., of good character, and valuable as affording an 
 example of a general arrangement of designs throughout an 
 entire building. 
 
 Some glass of the reign of Henry VII. has been inserted in 
 the four upper south windows of the great west transept of 
 the Cathedral : the heads of some, if not all of the figures, are 
 restorations. 
 
 A very beautiful glass-painting, of the last half of the sixteenth 
 century^ has been inserted in the window next the east, of the 
 south aisle of the choir. It was presented to the Cathedral by 
 Lord Carlisle in 1804, and was brought from a church at Kouen. 
 The design is evidently taken from a painting, I believe by 
 Baroccio (who died in 1612, aged 84), but the colouring and 
 execution have been varied to suit the nature of the material 
 
IX THE CATHEDEAL AND CHURCHES OF YORK. 75 
 
 employed. I infer from the column-like arrangement of the 
 groups, as well as the actual division-lines of the glass, that this 
 work was originally painted for a four-light window. This is 
 neither the place nor the occasion for any discussion touching 
 the relative merits of this and the earlier glass-paintings in the 
 Cathedral ; but I may be permitted to observe that this work 
 affords a proof that it is not impossible to unite the drawing and 
 colouring of an advanced period of art to the true practice of 
 glass-painting. In the windows by Peckitt at the south end 
 of the great west transept, the principles of painting upon glass 
 and painting upon canvas are confounded together; in attempt- 
 ing to imitate the depth of an oil-painting by shadows alone, he 
 has simply produced opacity, than which no greater fault can be 
 committed in glass-painting. 
 
 I cannot conclude these remarks without expressing a hope 
 that before this meeting separates some measures will be taken 
 far cataloguing all the painted glass in the Cathedral and Parish 
 Churches of York. A really correct and properly detailed cata- 
 logue of the glass in the Cathedral alone would be a most 
 valuable addition to our archaeological publications. Many of 
 those windows are perfect histories in themselves ; and contain 
 information which can hardly be collected elsewhere. Yet how 
 little is known of them ! The French antiquaries have already 
 made correct catalogues of the glass in many of their principal 
 buildings ; and why should not their example be imitated in 
 England ? we may be sure that the longer it is delayed the more 
 difficult will become the task ; Time never sleeps, and in spite 
 of all our precautions is perpetually destroying the evidences of 
 history committed to so frail a material as glass. One of the 
 principal obstacles to obtaining a correct catalogue of painted 
 glass, the difficulty of procuring a person competent to the task, 
 does not exist in the present case. I could have wished that 
 Mr. Browne had in his own work given, what he is perfectly 
 capable of making, a full and complete catalogue of the glass in 
 the Cathedral ; but a very cursory examination of the windows 
 has convinced me that he has exercised a sound discretion in 
 declining such an undertaking on his own account. I repeat 
 again that a good catalogue of the York glass would be an 
 achievement worthy of the Institute, that it would stamp its 
 proceedings with a character of usefulness, and perhaps induce 
 other antiquarian societies to commence similar undertakings. 
 The reloading of painted windows in a careful manner, and 
 
76 
 
 PAINTED GLASS IN YOKK CATHEDRAL, ETC. 
 
 insuring the retention of even every little fragment of original 
 glass in its original position during the operation, is a work 
 which cannot be too strongly advocated; but at the same 
 time can never supersede the necessity of making full and 
 accurate catalogues, which may remain after the glass itself has 
 perished. 
 
i^LATE ]X. ' 
 
 LINCOLN CATHEDRAL. 
 
 INSERTED IN THE NORTH ROSE V\//NOOW. 
 
 Charles "Wfinstcn, del 
 
 Philip Delamotte.Litho 
 
 Ytncent Broo'ks 
 
111. 
 
 AN ACCOUNT OF 
 
 THE PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER: 
 
 WITH SOME GENERAL EEMARKS ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archseological Institute at the Annual 
 Meeting at Lincoln, 1848.) 
 
 PROPOSE in this paper to give some account of 
 the remains of ancient painted glass existing in 
 Lincoln Cathedral and Southwell Minster. But 
 as I have reason to believe that the subject of 
 Glass-painting is far from being generally under- 
 stood, and that it has not received that degree of 
 attention Avhich it deserves, whether considered 
 as occupying a prominent place among the arts 
 of the Middle Ages, or as an art which the taste of the present 
 day has caused to be extensively revived, I shall venture to 
 take a wider range than is absolutely necessary, and, instead of 
 confining myself to a description of these remains, combine with 
 it such an account of the process of glass-painting, and of its 
 past history and variations, as, by affording some knowledge of 
 the practical details of the art, may remove an obstacle which, 
 meeting the antiquary or amateur at his first entrance on the 
 study of glass-painting, often deters him from pursuing the 
 subject, or giving due attention to it. In conclusion, I shall 
 offer a few remarks on the present practice of the art, and 
 suggestions for removing some of the difficulties which beset its 
 advancement. 
 
 The art of Painting on Glass, which it may be proper to state 
 is very different from the art of making coloured glass — an art 
 of remote antiquity — was probably suggested by the very ancient 
 practice of painting on earthenware with enamel, and the use 
 of coloured glass in mosaics : but from the silence of classical 
 
78 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDEAL 
 
 authors on the subject, the absence of antique specimens, and 
 the character of ancient buildings, as well domestic as public, 
 it seems to have been invented subsequently to the coming of 
 our Lord. Yet, although it cannot be carried back beyond the 
 Christian era, the art is undoubtedly of considerable antiquity, 
 as the Treatise on the subject, which is found in the second 
 book of the * Diversarum Artium Schedula ' of Theophilus, is of 
 itself sufficient to prove. This treatise, which is as early as the 
 tenth century, describes so perfect and complete a process of 
 glass-painting, as to justify the conclusion that the art itself 
 must have been invented at a much earlier period.^ So per- 
 fect, indeed, is the method given in the treatise (which has 
 been rendered accessible to the general reader by the recent 
 publication of a French and two English translations),^ that it 
 continued to be followed, without any material change, until 
 almost the middle of the sixteenth century. But to however 
 remote a period the invention of the art may be referred, the 
 most ancient specimens of it which at present exist are not so 
 early as even the tenth century. The oldest existing painted 
 glass to which a date can, with certainty, be assigned, has been 
 considered by M. de Lasteyrie, and other eminent French anti- 
 quaries, to be the remains of the glass at St. Denys, which w^as 
 painted in the middle of the twelfth century by order of Abbot 
 Suger, who has left an interesting account of it. But it is not 
 impossible that painted glass much earlier than this may be 
 discovered ; indeed M. Gerente, an ingenious imitator of ancient 
 painted glass, lately exhibited to me tracings made from some 
 painted glass at Mans Cathedral, in France, which glass seemed 
 to be as early as the latter part of the eleventh century. Theo- 
 philus, in the treatise before mentioned, particularly extols the 
 skill of the French glass-painters, and France is at this day the 
 grand storehouse of painted glass of the earliest style. The 
 little we possess in England is, however, not inferior in quality 
 to the French glass. Some of the oldest glass in this country 
 is part of a Jesse window in Canterbury Cathedral ; and part 
 of another Jesse in York Minster, which has been inserted into 
 the tracery lights of the Decorated clearstory windows of the 
 
 1 The art of g\a,ss-making is also de- ruins of Roman villas, and which has 
 
 scribed in this treatise. The glass was a straight selvage, was made in this 
 
 formed into a cylinder, and opened or manner, 
 
 spread out into a sheet. Sheets so made ^ Those by Count De I'Escalopier, 
 
 have straight selvages. It is not im- by Mr. Hendrie, and in the appendix to 
 
 probable that the glass found in the the ' Hints on Glass-painting.' 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MIXSIER. 79 
 
 nave.^ All this glass is of the last half of the twelfth century ; 
 so that the glass at York is older than any part of the existing 
 edifice, with the exception of the crypt under the choir. And 
 this is by no means a solitary instance of the original glass 
 having been preserved when an old structure was pulled down 
 and rebuilt in the Middle Ages. 
 
 Having thus alluded to the probable antiquity of the art, and 
 noticed a few of the most ancient specimens, I think it will be 
 convenient briefly to describe what may be called Theophilus's 
 System of Glass-painting and the alterations that were after- 
 wards engrafted upon it ; since by so doing I shall give a general 
 notion of the process of glass-painting, and show the chief sources 
 of the varieties of style that are afterwards specified. 
 
 As I shall have occasion to mention several different kinds 
 of glass used in glass-painting, for the sake of perspicuity and 
 brevity I will state that by White glass I mean glass w^hich 
 in the course of its manufacture has not intentionally been 
 coloured ; that by Coloured glass I mean glass to which some 
 colour has purposely been given in its manufacture ; that by 
 Pot-metal glass I mean a particular kind of coloured glass, viz. 
 glass coloured throughout its entire substance; and that by 
 Coated glass (which is sometimes, though inaccurately, called 
 Flashed glass) I mean another kind of coloured glass, ^iz. glass 
 coloured on one side only of the sheet. The glass-painter, it 
 should be added, does not make the glass he paints; though, at 
 an early period, it would seem that he did so. 
 
 The glass-painter, having made his design, which in the 
 earliest period was drawn wdth lead, tin, or chalk on a board or 
 table prepared for the purpose, transferred it to the glass in the 
 following manner. He cut from the sheet pieces of white and 
 coloured glass, corresponding in size and shape to those parts of 
 the design which he intended to be white and coloured respect- 
 ively, and fitted them accurately together, so as to form a piece 
 of coarse mosaic work ; each colour of the design being repre- 
 sented by a separate piece of glass. He then proceeded to paint 
 the outlines and shadows of the design upon these pieces of 
 glass, using for the pm-pose an Enamel colour, similar to that 
 now known amongst glass-painters by the name of "Enamel 
 Brown ;" and which, like any other enamel colour, is comj^osed 
 of two ingredients, — Flux, that is, soft glass which melts readily 
 
 * See Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at York ; paper on the 
 Painted Gla«s, p. 71 ante. 
 
80 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDKAL 
 
 in the fire, and some kind of Colouring matter indestructible by- 
 heat. The next step was to subject the glass to the action of 
 Red heat, in a kiln or furnace, in order to make the Enamel 
 Brown attach itself to the glass by the melting of the flux ; and 
 the process was completed by connecting together the various 
 pieces of painted glass with lead-work, and setting up the glass 
 painting in the window. A more simple method of producing 
 a pictorial effect can hardly be imagined. The picture was 
 coloured by using white and coloured glass ; its outlines, shadows, 
 and diaper patterns alone were painted by the artist. In the 
 early part of the fourteenth century the glass-painters dis- 
 covered a means of Staining white glass yellow, and of im- 
 parting a yellow tint to most kinds of coloured glass. The 
 principal ingredient of the Yellow Stain is oxide or chloride of 
 silver ; it imparts its tint to the glass — penetrating it a little 
 way — on being exposed to the action of a red heat. A new 
 mode of executing the shadows and diaper grounds with the 
 Enamel Brown was adopted just before the close of the four- 
 teenth century. Previously to this time, a coat of Enamel 
 Brown was smeared over those parts only of the glass that were 
 intended to be in shadow, the lights being left clear and un- 
 touched ; but according to the new method, the Enamel Brown 
 was spread all over the glass, and stippled^ whilst moist to 
 obliterate the marks of the brush and give smoothness to the 
 coat; and the parts intended to represent the lights of the 
 picture were afterwards restored to their original transparency 
 by the removal of the enamel ground from off them. The first 
 and oldest kind of shading may be called Smear shading, and 
 the second Stipple shading ; the distinction being important to 
 the antiquary and artist. Towards the middle of the fifteenth 
 century a method was discovered of exhibiting to view patches 
 of white glass in the midst of a coloured surface by the destruc- 
 tion of corresponding portions of the coloured stratum of coated 
 glass, an invention which facilitated the representation, in their 
 proper colours, of heraldic bearings and other minute subjects ; 
 but this, being tedious and expensive in practice, was not exten- 
 sively resorted to. At the beginning of the sixteenth century 
 the introduction of another Enamel colour, rather redder in hue 
 
 ' The stippling process was not a ently called " smear shading stippled," 
 
 novelty: it was occasionally used, even to distinguish it botli from the ordi- 
 
 as eai-ly as the reign of Edward II., to nary "smear shading" and "stipple 
 
 soften the effect of the smear shading, shading." 
 Shading, so executed, may be conveni- 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 81 
 
 than the Enamel Brown, may be noticed. It was chiefly used 
 to heighten the complexions and to warm tlie flesh tint. Xo 
 other innovations, however, on the system of Theophilus, wliich 
 may with propriety be called the Mosaic System of Glass- 
 painting, were made until the middle of the sixteenth centurv. 
 The most gorgeous glass-paintings in existence, all which were 
 executed during the first half of the sixteenth century, owe 
 their plenitude of effect simply to the fuller develojunent of the 
 Mosaic system. 
 
 In the middle of the sixteenth century, however, or in France 
 and Flanders a few years earlier, it was discovered that all other 
 colours besides yellow, brown, and light red, could be given to 
 white glass by means of Enamel colours and the Stain ; and 
 thus the artist became in a measure independent of the glass- 
 maker for colouring glass. But the introduction of the Enamel 
 System of Glass-painting, as this may be called, did not imme- 
 diately lead to the disuse of coloured glass ; the euamels being 
 at first employed either to colour those parts of the design 
 which, from the difficulty of leading in pieces of coloured 
 glass, must otherwise have remained uncoloured, or imjDroperly 
 coloured; or to heighten the tint of the coloured glass. The 
 joint operation, however, of colouring glass by means of enamels, 
 and the disuse of glass-painthigs on an extended scale, led, at 
 last, to the abandonment of the manufacture of coloured glass in 
 France, and to its great deterioration in this kingdom and else- 
 where. Le Vieil informs us that in 17GS no coloured glass 
 was made in France.^ In England the Pot-metals continued to 
 be made, but the manufacture of Coated glass appears to have 
 ceased towards the latter part of the seventeenth centurv. I 
 have not met with any example of Euby glass, ^. e. Coated Bed 
 glass, later than that in the east window of Lincoln Cathedral, 
 which was executed by Peckitt in 1762. It is of very inferior 
 quality, but not worse than what was made some sixty years 
 before. The manufacture of Biibv,^ as well as of other kinds of 
 
 1 ' L'Art de la Peinture sur Verre et lation of Otto Fromberg's ' Handbuch 
 
 de la Vitrerie, par feu Le Vieil/ p. 84. der Glasmalerei,' in Weale's Quarterly 
 
 - A careful microscopical examination Papers ; and Lardner's ' Porcelain and 
 of several specimens of modern and Glass Manufacture/ p. 276.] The in- 
 ancient " ruby glass " has convinced me gredients for making ruby glass are 
 that the old was manufactured in the mentioned amongst the receiots for 
 same Uianner as the new. colouring glass given in Xeri, ' De Arte 
 
 The red colour is clearly ascertained Vitraria,' in the French work of Blan- 
 
 to be producible by copper in a high court, and also in the 'Mappa Clavi- 
 
 state of oxidation. [See Clarke's trans- cula/ a MS. of the 10th century, 
 
 G 
 
82 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 Coated glass, was revived in France about twenty years ago ; 
 but its having lain dormant for a period, together with the 
 deteriorated quality of Pot-metal glass, have given rise to a 
 belief that the art of glass-painting, as formerly practised, has 
 been lost. This belief is fast wearing out, but its effect is still 
 felt in the propensity to be satisfiad with a glass-painting, what- 
 ever may be its demerits as a work of art, provided it exhibits 
 bright and striking colours. 
 
 The very changes which have taken place in the practice of 
 the art thus afford, of themselves, a means of ascertaining the 
 age of any particular glass-painting ; but in consequence of the 
 length of time during which each mode was practised, they do 
 not present any precise evidence of date, nor do they furnish 
 the means of a classification sufficiently discriminating in other 
 respects. We are, therefore, obliged to look amongst minute 
 details for the distinguishing characteristics of tlie successive 
 periods of glass-painting, and to found upon them, in conjunction 
 with the changes above-mentioned, the division of the art into 
 those several styles which, together with a brief notice of some 
 of their peculiarities, I shall presently enumerate. 
 
 Theophilus's, or the Mosaic System of Glass-painting, con- 
 tinued to be followed, as already stated, until about the middle 
 of the sixteenth century, and thus comprehends all the mediaeval 
 
 printed in the 23rd vol. of the ' Archaeo- 15th or IGth century, in one of the 
 logia,' p. 183 et seq. See the chapters - windows of the tower called *' Cook's 
 cclvii., cclviii, entitled, ' Confectio Folly," near Clifton : and no doubt 
 vitri rubri.' None of these authors, many others exist. Peckitt's ruby was, 
 however, describe the mode of form- I am sure, manufactured exactly as 
 ing the glass into sheets. The chapter above described ; the failure of the red 
 in the treatise of Theophilus, which, and the green tint imparted to the 
 from its heading, 'De Vitro quod glass in places are defects not unfre- 
 vocatur Gallien,' we may suppose bore quently exhibited by more ancient spe- 
 on the subject, is lost. [See ' Hints on cimens, and may easily be accounted for. 
 Glass-painting,' p. 311.] There can be A new kind of ruby glass, which, for 
 no doubt, however, that ruby glass was convenience sake, may be called " ena- 
 anciently formed into sheets, as it is melled ruby," has lately been manu- 
 now, by blowing a lump of white glass, factured by Mr. Hartley, The colour- 
 covered with a coat of ruby, into a ing matter is spread, with a brush, over 
 hollow sphere, which was afterwards the surface of a sheet of yellow or white 
 converted into a flat sheet in the usual glass, to which it becomes united, like 
 way, A specimen of ruby glass, of the a transparent enamel, on exposure to a 
 13th century, exhibiting the mark of a sufiicient heat in a kiln, A similar 
 " punt," or " bull's eye," is described process is described, as applicable to 
 in the 'Hints on Glass-painting,' p. other colours, in ' L'Art de la Peinture 
 341. This, in connection with other sur Verre et de Vitrerie, par feu Le 
 circumstances, is decisive as to the mode Vieil,' part 2, ch. 3. It is clear that 
 of manufacture. I have met with a the ancient ruby was not manufactured 
 similar instance, but not older than the in this manner. 
 
AND SOUTH^YELL MINSTER. 83 
 
 varieties ; and those varieties may be conveniently divided into 
 styles, like the varieties of mediaeval architecture, and in like 
 manner may be classed under the head of the Early English 
 style, the Decorated style, &c. 
 
 The Early English style includes all glass-paintings executed 
 prior to 1280. Some works of this period I have already men- 
 tioned, when sj^eaking of the antiquity of glass-painting. The 
 great Eose or Wheel window of the transept of the cathedral of 
 this city also belongs to it. The description which I shall pre- 
 sently give of this window will afford an opportunity of indicating 
 some of the characteristic features of the style, and it will also 
 serve to illustrate the arrangement which is usual in similar 
 works of this ao-e. I therefore abstain from enterins: at all into 
 these particulars at present. 
 
 The Decorated style prevailed from 1280 to 1380. There 
 are numerous and excellent specimens of this style in England, 
 though hardly any remains belonging to it are found in Lincoln 
 Cathedral. As early examples, I may mention the painted 
 glass in the choir of Merton College Chapel, Oxford ; in tlie 
 Chapter-house at York; in the chancel of Xorbury Church, 
 Derbyshire, &c. : and as later examples, the glass in the choir 
 of Bristol Cathedral; in the nave of York Cathedral; in Stan- 
 ford Church, Xorthamj^tonshu'e ; in the east window of Glou- 
 cester Cathedral, &c. The earlier examples of this style are 
 distinguished from the Early English principally by the archi- 
 tectural details of the canopy-work (a common accompaniment 
 to Decorated picture glass-paintings), and the flow^ing tendril 
 scrollages and naturally-formed leaves in the ornamental pat- 
 terns. The later examples, in addition to these peculiarities, 
 generally exhibit the Yellow Stain, and are also less intense in 
 colour compared with Early English glass-paintings. In all 
 Decorated painted glass, the outline is usually less strong, and 
 the drawing less vigorous, than the Early English. 
 
 The Perpendicular style prevailed fi'om 1380 to 1530. In 
 the choir of York Minster is an excellent series of examples, 
 extending from the last quarter of the fourteenth century to 
 about the middle of the j&fteenth. There are also some good 
 early remains in the Antechapel of lisew College, Oxford ; and 
 later ones at 3Ialvern Church, AYorcestershire ; and especially 
 at Fairford Church, Gloucestershire, the painted windows of 
 which edifice are of the early part of the sixteenth centur}\ I 
 may also mention another well-known example, rather earlier 
 than the glass at Fairford, — the windows of the north aisle of 
 
 G 2 
 
84 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 Cologne Cathedral. The grand characteristics which distinguish 
 Perpendicular glass-paintings from Early English and Decorated, 
 are greater breadths of unbroken colour, tints of diminished 
 intensity, and 'the introduction of a greater proportion of white 
 glass even in the most richly-coloured pictures. The later 
 examples, as at Fairford, are often highly picturesque in treat- 
 ment and design. The foliaged ornaments, the devices on the 
 quarries, of whi(?h the ornamented patterns in this style are 
 formed, are In'ghly conventional and unnatural in form, and the 
 style of execution is very delicate and finished. The Stipple 
 Shading is also an important feature in glass-paintings of this 
 style, and will often enable the student to determine whether a 
 particular example is Perpendicular or Decorated. 
 
 The style which succeeded the Perpendicular, after having 
 been for nearly thirty years concurrent with it, I have called 
 the Cinquecento. It prevailed from the beginning of the 
 sixteenth century until the general introduction of Enamel 
 colours, about the middle of that century. The character of 
 the ornamental details — whence the name of the style — is of 
 itself sufficient to distinguish Cinquecento from Perpendicular 
 glass-paintings, in which the Gothic details are followed. In 
 other respects it would not be easy to draw the line between the 
 later examples of the one style and the earlier examples of 
 the other ; the same mode of execution being used in each. The 
 finest specimens of Cinquecento glass-paintings are amongst 
 the works of the Flemish school ; these possess a power and 
 a richness in comparison with Avhich the French and English 
 examples appear weak and timid. There are some splendid 
 specimens of the style at Lichfield Cathedral, brought from the 
 neighbourhood of Liege in the early part of the present century. 
 The east window of St. Margaret's, Westminster, which has all 
 the appearance of being Flemish, is another splendid work ; but 
 perhaps no windows so fully impress the spectator with the 
 power of painted glass as those of the chapel of the Miraculous 
 Sacrament, on the north side of Brussels Cathedral. 
 
 It seems unnecessary to enter into any lengthened remarks 
 on the styles of glass-painting which have prevailed from the 
 Cinquecento period until within the last twenty years ; for 
 with the exception of the east window of the choir of Lincoln, 
 there is no example here to which such remarks can apply ; 
 and this, being a kaleidosco})e of plain pieces of glass, need not 
 be further noticed. Such glass-paintings are in general easily 
 to be distinguished from the Cinquecento by the Enamel 
 
AXD SOUTHWELL MIXSTEE. 85 
 
 colouring which is used in them ; as well as by their dullness 
 and opacity in several instances, and by their washiness and 
 flimsiness in others. The last defect is most apparent in those 
 specimens in which the use of white glass coloured with enamels, 
 instead of coloured glass, has prevailed to the greatest extent. 
 The best English examples of the combined use of Enamel 
 colom-ing and Coloured glass are the works of the Van Linges, 
 in the first half of the seventeenth century, and those of the 
 Prices in the early part of the eighteenth. It cannot be denied 
 that a very powerful pictorial effect is produced by many of 
 these works ; yet even in the most favom-able examples we seek 
 in vain for that sparkling brilliancy and translucency which 
 characterise the equally powerful glass-paintings of the Cinque- 
 cento period, and indeed constitute the chief beauty of a glass- 
 painting. The poverty of glass-paintings in which the colouring 
 is wholly produced by enamels is well exemplified in the 
 "washy Virtues" at Xew College Chapel, Oxford, and in the 
 windows of Arundel Castle, Sussex. 
 
 The precedmg outline, however imperfect, of the progress 
 of glass-painting, and of the styles under which the ancient 
 varieties are classed, will enable us to enter upon an exami- 
 nation of the windows of this Cathedral and of Southwell 
 Minster ; and in the course of it I shall occasionally introduce 
 a few remarks which may serve to illustrate what has before 
 been said. 
 
 The glass of the Early English st}ie remaining in the 
 cathedral is, I think, of the first half of the thirteenth century. 
 The great Eose or Awheel window in the north transept must 
 be admitted to be one of the most splendid, and, in its present 
 state, one of the most perfect, works of the thirteenth century.^ 
 It is much to be regretted that no engraving exists of this 
 window ; the want of accurate prints of entire ^\indows is, in- 
 deed, a serious obstacle to the study of ancient glass.^ One only 
 
 ^ For a description of this window, sufficiently perfect to satisfy the student, 
 
 and of the subjects in it, see the Memoir Even in the short list which follows, 
 
 on the glazing of the Xorth Rose some imperfect specimens are neces- 
 
 Wiadow of Lincoln Cathedi-al. The de- sarily included. In the chou' of Canter- 
 
 scriptiun which was contained in the birry Cathedral are many good speci- 
 
 present memoir, being in some respects mens of Early English Medtilliou 
 
 imperfect, is omitted. windows, and considerable remains of 
 
 - Such has been the destruction or Figure and Canopy, and Jesse windows, 
 
 mutilation of the works of the English Lincoln Cathedral has the splendid 
 
 school of Glass-painting, that it is diffi- noi-th Rose above mentioned. Salisbury 
 
 cult to form a series of entii'e windows, Cathedral contains some excellent Early 
 
 or of considerable portions of windows, English white Pattern windows. La uer 
 
86 
 
 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 of the subjects, the Angels supporting the Cross, has been 
 engraved, but not accurately, in Fowler's 'Mosaic Pavements 
 
 examples of the same kind are afforded 
 by the Five Sisters at York, and the 
 east window of Chetwode Church, 
 Berks ; in the hist, the effect of intro- 
 ducing pictures into a white pattern 
 may be seen. The five-light east 
 Avindow of Selling Cliurch, Kent, is a 
 Decorated white pattern, witli pictures 
 inserted, of the latter part of the reign 
 of Edward I. The east window of 
 Checkley Church, Staffordshire, bears a 
 considei'able resemblance to the last. 
 The side windows of Merton Chapel, 
 Oxford, are white Pattern windows, 
 with pictures inserted, of the latter part 
 of Edward I.'s reign ; and the head of 
 the east window is a rich specimen of 
 decorative colouring. The windows of 
 the Chapter-house at York are cai^ly in 
 the reign of Edward II. They consist 
 of white patterns with pictures inserted. 
 The side windows of the chancel of 
 J^orbury Church, Derbyshire, are of the 
 same date and general design as the 
 last, but Contain shields of arms instead 
 of pictures. The head of the east 
 wuidow of Froyle Church, Hants, is an 
 excellent specimen of heraldic decora- 
 tion, of the latter part of the reign of 
 Edward IL Of the same date are the 
 Figure and Canopy windows in the 
 choir of Tewkesbury Church, and in the 
 clearstory of the choir of Wells Cathe- 
 dral ; as well as the Jesse east window 
 of the same cathedral. This window, 
 though more perfect, is inferior in de- 
 sign to the Jesse east window of Bristol 
 Cathedral, the date of which is about 
 1330. The west window of York nave 
 is a Figure and Canopy window, early 
 in the reign of Edward III. ; and amongst 
 the side windows, which consist chiefly 
 of white pattei-ns with pictures inserted, 
 may be enumerated a Jesse, and some 
 Figure and Canopy windows, all being 
 of the early part of the same reign. St. 
 Denis Church, York, has a Figure and 
 Canopy window late in the reign of 
 Edward III. ; of which date is the mag- 
 nificent east window of Gloucester 
 Cathedral. It consists chiefly of figures 
 and canopies, and partly of white pat- 
 tei^ns. The east window of Levrincrton 
 
 Church, Cambridgeshire, is a very early 
 Perpendicular Jesse. The Antechapel 
 of New College, Oxford, contains several 
 Figure and Canopy windows of the 
 reign of Eichard II. There are some 
 equally early examples in the clearstory 
 of York choir. Indeed, the choir of 
 this Cathedral is a perfect mine of Per- 
 pendicular glass, varying in date from 
 this time to the reign of Henry VI. ; 
 and comprising in its aisles a Jesse 
 window, as well as windows whose de- 
 sign, like the east window, consists of a 
 number of small pictures placed one 
 over the other. St. Martin's Church, 
 York, has a west window full of small 
 pictures, and clearstory windows with 
 figures and arms, on quarry grounds, 
 of the time of Henry VI. The Hall 
 windows of Ockwell's House, Berks, are 
 filled with heraldic achievements of the 
 middle of the fifteenth century, consist- 
 ing of shields, mantlings, &c., of the 
 boldest and most striking design. Good 
 Pattern windows of the latter part of 
 this century may be seen in the Hall of 
 the Bede House, Ijyddington, Putland- 
 shire ; and in the Dean's Chapel, Can- 
 terbury Cathedral. Faii'ford Church, 
 ■ Gloucestershire, contains a number of 
 Picture windows, of various designs, of 
 the early part of the sixteenth century, 
 which deserve the greatest attention. 
 King's Chapel, Cambi'idge, is full of 
 early Cinquecento Picture windows. 
 The east window of Bowness Church, 
 Westmoreland, also belongs to this 
 style; as well as the beautiful Jesse at 
 Llanrhaidr Church, Denbighshire, and 
 the east window of St. Margaret's, 
 Westminster. The east window of Peter- 
 house Chapel, Cambridge, is a favour- 
 able specimen of the style which suc- 
 ceeded the Cinquecento. Of the works 
 of the Van Linges there are abund- 
 ance at Oxford, particularly in the 
 cathedral ; and in Lincoln's Inn Chapel. 
 Tlie east window of St. Andrew's, Hol- 
 born, which was painted by Price, is 
 deserving of notice. This list might be 
 greatly increased by adding more muti- 
 lated, though hardly less valuable, spe- 
 cimens to it. 
 
Plate 11. 
 
 C. WINSTON. 
 
 I.£IGBTO>- ,SBOS, 
 
 PART OF A JESSE WINDOW. 
 
 NORTH AISLE, LLAXRHAIDR CHURCH, DENBIGHSHIRE. 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MIXSTER. 87 
 
 and Painted Glass.' No other portion of the Early English 
 glass is in its original position. It is clear that the white 
 patterns which fill the five windows immediately below the 
 north Eose have been removed from other windows ; and the 
 same remark applies to the contents of both the lowest north 
 windows of the transept. In the westernmost of these two 
 windows, near the bottom, the figures of five angels, playing on 
 musical instruments, have been inserted. These are late De- 
 corated, of excellent character, and belong in all probability 
 to the west window of the nave. Most of the glass in the 
 southern Kose is Early English, collected from other windows : 
 a collection of various pieces of Early English glass, chiefly 
 pictures, likewise fills tlie other four south w^indows of the 
 transept. The lower lights of the east windows of the north 
 and south choir aisles are also filled with a similar collection 
 of Early English glass-paintings ; amongst which are some 
 Medallions, representing, according to the opinion of Mr. E. J. 
 Willson, of Lincoln, incidents in the Ufe of St. Hugh of 
 Lincoln. St. Hugh died Bishop of Lincoln in 1200, and was 
 canonised by Pope Honorius III. in 1220. I am informed 
 by Mr. Willson that this glass was removed about sixty years 
 ago from the windows of the aisles of the nave to its present 
 resting-place ; and that a chantry in a chapel adjoining the 
 nave, having an altar dedicated to St. Hugh, was founded by 
 Bishop Hugh de ^Velles, who died in 1235. I'he glass exhibits 
 internal evidence of being of corresponding date. It is easy to 
 recognise in these remains those striking featm-es which indicate 
 the Early English style of glass-painting ; such as the extraor- 
 dinary intensity and vividness of the colours, the strength and 
 boldness of the outhne, the tallness of the figures, their vigorous 
 and spirited attitudes, and classical air of their heads ; also the 
 conventional character of the foliaged ornaments, as displaved in 
 the borders and white patterns, and which resemble the orna- 
 ments of the contemporary sculpture. The north Eose, which 
 has been already described, also exhibits the general principles of 
 composition common to any Early English window tliat contains 
 a number of pictures. Each picture, the design of which is 
 always very simple, is placed in a panel having a stiff-coloured 
 ground and well-defined border. The panels are also embedded 
 in a stiff-coloured ground. Very little white glass is used, 
 so that the window consists of a mass of rich and variegated 
 colouring, of Avhich the predominant tints are those of the 
 grounds. The design, owing to the smallness of its parts, is 
 
88 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 confused when seen from the floor of the transept. The various 
 panels which have been inserted into the other windows, no 
 doubt, once formed integral parts of Medallion windows. 
 The north Kose shows the general effect of a Medallion 
 window ; and some idea of its design is conveyed by the modern 
 imitation window in the south aisle of the cathedral. The 
 original ironwork of a Medallion window still remains in the 
 first window from the west in the south aisle of the na^e, and 
 may be regarded as indicating what were the principal divisions 
 of tlie design of the glass-painting. 
 
 There are a few fragments of Decorated glass of the time ot 
 Edward II. in the tracery lights of the first window from 
 the east of the south aisle of the choir, and a little more, 
 somewhat earlier, in one or two of the windows of the opposite 
 aisle. The east window of the choir has been deprived of its 
 original glazing. It appears, from a note taken of it a few years 
 previous to the Rebellion, and brought to my notice by the 
 Venerable the Archdeacon, that it contained the arms of many 
 of the English nobility ; from which circumstance it may be 
 inferred, that the original glass was early Decorated, or at all 
 events of transitional character ; heraldry not being found in 
 the more ancient examples of Early English glass. A portion of 
 a late Early English white pattern is inserted in the east window 
 of the chapter-house at Southwell. It has been engraved in 
 Shaw's ^Ornaments.' 
 
 Tlie glass which fills the upper tracery lights of the west 
 window of the nave of Lincoln is late Decorated, a little later, 
 perhaps, than the middle of the fourteenth century. The five 
 angels, already mentioned as being in one of the lower windows 
 of the north transept, are of the same date as this : they most 
 probably formed part of the west window. This window, 
 judging from the forms of the foliaged scroll-work remaining in 
 its tracery lights and round the angels, seems to have been 
 a Jesse window. The Smear Shading in the angels and foliaged 
 ornaments deserves attention. I should here notice a small 
 piece of the foliaged scroll-work belongs to this window, which 
 has been inserted in the Decorated south Kose window, near the 
 bottom of its eastern side ; because this glass, wlien compared 
 with the surrounding Early English glass, betrays, by the light- 
 ness of its effect, the great difference in texture that certainly 
 exists between Decorated and Early English glass. ^ 
 
 ^ I am thus minute in uoticiug speci- manner, the difference in texture be- 
 mens calculated to show, in a striking tween glass of different d^ites. becauP", 
 
AXD SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 89 
 
 At Southwell Minster, in the chapter-house, are some few 
 remnants of early Decorated glass of the reign of Edward I. 
 They consist chiefly of portions of tracery lights, and of the 
 spires and crockets of canopies belonging to the lower lights. 
 These crockets are identical in form with those carved in stone 
 round the chapter-house. In one of the tracery lights of the 
 second window from the east, on the south, is a small medallion 
 of white glass, on which is represented a knight on hoseback, 
 tilting, with a long spear under his arm. He is habited in 
 a long surcoat which reaches below the knees, and is armed in a 
 hauberk, and chausses of mail. His helmet is surmounted with 
 a crest resembling the wing of a bird. In one of the opposite 
 windows are remains of heraldic borders, consisting of the 
 yellow castles of Castile, and of a white lion ramj^ant on a red 
 field. 
 
 The Perpendicular remains of glass in Lincoln Cathedral are 
 but trifling. Three small circles emblematic of the months of 
 March, April, and July, are inserted in the midst of the principal 
 tracery lights of the east windows of the south and north aisles 
 of the choir. X head in this style has also been supplied to the 
 lowest of the five Decorated angels already mentioned as being 
 in one of the north windows of the transept ; in this head, as 
 well as in the other Perpendicular work, Stipple Shading is used. 
 An heraldic border, composed of small parallelograms of white 
 glass, each bearing a black chevron between three black crosses 
 botonne, and a black border with yellow pellets, remains in the 
 central lower light of the third window from the east of the 
 north choir aisle. I suspect that these parallelograms were 
 originally separated from each other by small pieces of plain 
 coloured glass. They are, I think, of the middle of the fifteenth 
 century. 
 
 At Southwell, the remains of Perpendicular glass are equally 
 scanty, being confined to a few late shields of arms, and other 
 fragments, in the west window of the nave. The four lower 
 east Avindows of the choir of this building are filled with Cinque- 
 cento glass-paintings, of the French school, the gift of the late 
 Mr. Gaily Knight, in 1818, and which represent the Baptism of 
 Christ, the Kaising of Lazarus, the Triumphant Entry into 
 Jerusalem, and the Mocking of Christ by the Jews. The first 
 subject, considered as a glass-painting, is rather poor, being weak 
 
 of all differences, this is the least appre- will agree that it is one of the most 
 r.iable by casual observers, though all important. 
 who have studied ancient painted glass 
 
90 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 botli in colour and shadow. The whole of tliis picture below the 
 knees of our Saviour is a modern addition, by the late Mr. Miller, 
 who adapted the glass to the present lights. The three other 
 subjects are effective and good, particularly the second, in which, 
 by a skilful management of the background, a striking effect of 
 distance and aerial perspective is produced. The third, as a 
 composition of colour, is perhaps the best. These windows, 
 though less powerful, are more brilliant than Flemish glass- 
 paintings of the same period. As pictures, they go far to estab- 
 lish the claim of glass-painting to be considered one of the fine 
 arts. 
 
 If glass-painting could be considered merely as an object 
 of antiquarian curiosity, I should here terminate my remarks 
 on the subject ; but as it is a practical art, and as the principal 
 motive for investigating its past condition and history is a 
 desire to advance and improve its present cultivation, 1 trust 
 that few of those who interest themselves in the study will think 
 that I am abusing the present occasion, if I proceed to offer 
 some observations on the best mode of developing its resources, 
 and carrying it onwards to perfection. 
 
 It will not be denied, I think, that the glass-paintings which 
 have been executed for churches within the last twenty years, 
 with few exceptions, leave very great room for improvement. 
 To include all these works under one common condemnation 
 would no doubt be unjust, yet it must be admitted that hardly 
 any, even of those most recently executed, can be considered 
 satisfactory, or worthy the cost that has been expended on them, 
 except perhaps so far as they may have been the means of 
 bringing the Mosaic system of glass-painting ^ again into favour. 
 They are for the most part servile but faulty imitations of older 
 examples; and, like copies in general, magnify the defects of 
 their originals without seizing upon their excellences. 
 
 These evils are in great measure attributable to a habit 
 amongst the patrons of glass-painting, of being satisfied with any 
 work that in their opinion possesses a chance of being mistaken 
 for an original example. Hence exactness of imitation is all that 
 is aimed at, and glass-painters are led to value ancient glass- 
 paintings only so far as they supply a means of making copies ; 
 instead of endeavouring to penetrate into their principles, and 
 found upon them a new and consistent style of glass-painting — 
 
 1 The superiority of the Mosaic system over all others is attempted to be 
 shown ill the ' Hints on Glass-painting/ part ii. section 2. 
 
AXD SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 91 
 
 an object for which the ancient examples are deserving of the 
 closest study. 
 
 The ground on wliich an exact imitation of Gothic glass- 
 paintings is generally and most plausibly maintained is an 
 opinion that they harmonize with Gothic architecture, and that 
 no others ai-e capable of doing so. It is important therefore, as 
 well for those wlio advocate the system of servile imitation, as 
 for those who would free artists from the letters which this 
 system imposes, to inquire in what respects, and how far, Gothic 
 glass-paintings do harmonize with Gothic architecture ; whether 
 we have the means of obtaining, by mere imitation of them, that 
 degree of harmony which they may be found to possess, and 
 whether the desired harmony is best to be obtained by a more 
 independent process. 
 
 When it is said that glass-paintings ought to harmonize with 
 the architecture with which they are united, the meaning is that 
 they should assist and heighten the effect of the architecture, 
 and present no features at variance with it. To produce this 
 result, agreeably to the ordinary rules which govern other kinds 
 of decoration, — for a glass-painting, as well as a fresco-painting, 
 is undoubtedly a species of decoration, — a certain degTce of con- 
 gruity is necessary between the glass-painting and the architec- 
 ture and sculpture, in their general character and composition. 
 A glass-painting intended for a church should possess a graver 
 character than one intended for a secular building, and the 
 ornaments, figures, and draperies represented in a Picture glass- 
 painting should resemble those in the sculpture in style and 
 general excellence. 3Ioreover, if the interior of the building, or 
 even the particular situation of the window, be dark and obscure, 
 the glass-painting ought to exhibit a predominance of deej) hues ; 
 if light, a lighter cast of colour in the work might be j^referable. 
 If the character of the architecture be cheerful, the tone of the 
 glass-painting should be warm ; if sombre and melancholy, the 
 tone of the glass-painting should be cold. Thus, buildings 
 having dark interiors, as Westminster Abbey, or St. Paul's 
 Cathedral, would require more powerfully coloured glass- 
 paintings than the choir of Southwell 3Iinster, or the church of 
 St. Clement Danes, in the Strand ; but as the character of Gothic 
 architecture is sombre and melancholy compared with that of 
 the Greek and Italian, glass-paintings designed for Westminster 
 Abbey, or South weU Minster, should be colder in tone than 
 those designed for St. Paul's or St. Clement Danes. In like 
 manner, windows situated in the dome of St. Pauls, or the 
 
92 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 transept of Lincoln Cathedral, might require to be more deeply 
 coloured than the windows in the choir of St. Paul's, or in the 
 choir of Lincoln ; yet the tone of colouring that would har- 
 monize with any part of Lincoln Cathedral would be colder and 
 more grave than that which would suit any part of St. Paul's. 
 
 Tested by these rules, Gothic glass-paintings will be found, in 
 some respects, to harmonize with the Gothic edifices that were 
 contemporaneous with them. They harmonize with the sculp- 
 ture in the form of their foliaged ornaments, heraldry, &c. ; and 
 (except perhaps in the latest examples) with the grave and 
 sombre character of the architecture, in the simplicity and cold 
 tone of their colouring. All glass-paintings earlier than the 
 last quarter of the fifteenth century are more or less cold in 
 colour: and it is a circumstance worthy of remark, though it 
 seems to result from accident rather than design, that, in pro- 
 portion as Gothic architecture became less gloomy and sombre, 
 Gothic glass-paintings, generally speaking, became not only 
 lighter in hue, but less cold in tone. Thus we find that the 
 glass-paintings which were contemporary with the Early English 
 and Early Decorated styles of architecture (which have a more 
 sombre air than any of the succeeding Gothic styles of architec- 
 ture) are in general the coldest in tone. This arises from the 
 green hue of the white glass, and the peculiar tints of the other 
 colours (which may perhaps be affected in some degree by the 
 hue of the white glass that forms their basis), as the crimson 
 tinted Kuby, the cold though rich Pot-metal yellow, and the 
 green hue which corrects the violet in the blue glass. The 
 yellow stain, though it enriched the effect of the early Decorated 
 glass-paintings, can hardly be said to have diminished their 
 coldness of tone, for it always partook of the hue of the white 
 glass. It was not until nearly the end of the fifteenth century, 
 at which time the sombreness of Gothic architecture had greatly 
 diminished, if not entirely disappeared, that we perceive in 
 painted glass anything approaching ivarmth of tone. Indeed, 
 even as late as the beginning of the fifteenth century, examples 
 are to be seen hardly less cold than Early English glass- 
 paintings. Again, though it would be difficult to prove that, 
 in proportion as Gothic interiors became less dark and obscure, 
 a preference was given to windows wholly or principally com- 
 posed of white patterns, it cannot be denied that, as Gothic 
 interiors became, by reason of the increased size and number of 
 their windows, more light, the Picture glass-paintings themselves 
 not only contained a less quantity of coloured and a greater 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 93 
 
 proportion of white and yellow stained glass, but eventually 
 their colours individually became less intense in hue. The glass 
 used in all Early English glass-paintings, whether white or 
 coloured, is, owing to its peculiar texture, remarkable for intensity 
 of hue. Even a white Pattern window of the Early English 
 style has a solidity of effect, arising from the strong rich green 
 tint and porcelain-like nature of its material, that would seem 
 but ill calculated to accord with a lighter style of architecture 
 than the Early English. Nothing could harmonize better with 
 the character of the north transept of York than the "Five 
 Sisters." But the deepest colouring known in painted glass 
 occurs in Early English Picture windows, especially in the 
 earlier examples. In these windows but little white glass is 
 used, and this generally is of a strong green tint ; deep blues 
 and reds predominate, and the lighter shades of colour, as 
 pink, purple, and violet, possess a relative degree of strength. 
 The colour of each picture is, in principle, simple and grave. 
 The flesh-colour is deep ; the draperies are stiff patches of white 
 or coloured glass, not designedly varying in depth ; and the 
 figure or group is usually backed with a stiff blue or red ground. 
 Landscapes with a gradually tinted sky never occur. The 
 general appearance of the window is a mass of variegated and 
 brilliant colouring of the deepest hue and most solemn tone. 
 Decorated Picture windows, however, though they exhibit the 
 same simple and grave principle of colouring, and though, at 
 least in the earlier examples of them, tints often occur indi- 
 vidually as intense as those of an Early English window, are, 
 owing to the greater infusion of white glass into their design, 
 considerably lighter in their general appearance than Early 
 English Picture windows. Progressive changes in the manu- 
 facture of the glass tended to diminish its intense hue and 
 apparently dense texture, but this, so far from checking the 
 employment of white glass in Picture glass-paintings, had tlie re- 
 verse effect ; as is shown by the Picture glass-paintings of the 
 Perpendicular style, in which there is always a much greater 
 proportion of white glass than is seen in Decorated examples. 
 The palest Picture glass-paintings are those of the latter half of 
 the fifteenth century, in which, in connection with a light cast 
 of colouring, the principle of employing a large proportion of 
 white glass is carried to the fullest extent. 
 
 But the harmony between Gothic Picture glass-paintings and 
 Gothic architecture does not seem to extend beyond what has 
 been stated. It is clear that these glass-paintings, in order 
 
94 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 perfectly to harmonize with the architecture, ought to be in all 
 respects as refined and advanced, in point of art, as the architec- 
 ture and sculpture are. It can, however, be easily proved that 
 Gothic Picture glass-paintings of every period are very inferior 
 in design and execution to the buildings and architectural 
 ornaments with w^hich they are associated. But it will be suffi- 
 cient to point out the incongruity, in some respects, of Early 
 English Picture glass-paintings and Early English architecture, 
 since these are the most popular styles of painted glass and 
 Gothic architecture, and between which the greatest degree of 
 harmony is usually supposed to exist. 
 
 A favourable specimen of Early English architecture suggests, 
 at least to ordinary observers, no incompleteness either in the 
 character and proportions of the architecture itself, or in the form 
 of its conventional ornaments. Yet any representation of the 
 human figure, when attempted in the sculpture, is immediately 
 perceived to be palpably incorrect both in its proportions and 
 details, defects easily accounted for when we consider the 
 peculiar study which the human form demands, and recollect 
 that in the thirteenth century — to use the words of Flax man — 
 " the sculptor could not be instructed in anatomy, for there were 
 no anatomists." ^ 
 
 On examining an Early English Picture glass-painting, we find 
 the human form still less correctly rendered than in the sculpture, 
 which is not sarprising, because, at a tiuie when the laws of Per- 
 spective were unknown, it was more difficult to draw correctly 
 than to model. In this respect, therefore, there is a want of 
 harmony between the glass and the architec^ture. But the 
 inferiority of Early English Picture glass-paintings to Early 
 English architecture is apparent in many other particulars. 
 For instance, that flagrant violation of the rule of composition 
 that regulates the size and complication of ornaments by the 
 distance from which they are intended to be seen, which is 
 so common in Early English Medallion windows, rarely, if ever, 
 occurs in Early English architecture or sculpture.^ Again, the 
 figures, and canopies, and alto-reliefs that adorn Early English 
 
 ' Lectvires on Sculpture, p. 15. on so small a scale, that it is difficult 
 
 2 The figures of the alto-reliefs repre- to make out its component parts from 
 
 senting the General Resurrection, which the floor of the cathedral, even with a 
 
 occupy the upper part of the west front pocket telescope. It is true that the 
 
 of Wells Cathedral, are distinctly visible glass is Early Decorated, and the sculp- 
 
 from below ; yet the same subject, ture Early English, yet the comparison 
 
 which occupies the lower lights of the may be fairly made, 
 east window of the choir, is executed 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 95 
 
 architecture, are remarkable for their boldness and prominence, 
 for strongly contrasted lights and shadows, and deep under- 
 cuttings ; yet in Early English glass-paintings the pictures are, 
 on the contrary, remarkable for their excessive flatness. The 
 canopy, for instance, conveys scarcely any other idea than that of 
 a border to the coloured ground in which the figure is imbedded ; 
 and in the medallion pictures, the objects in the background 
 are universally represented in the same plane with the group in 
 the foreground. This flatness, being unintentional, as clearly 
 appears from the abortive attempts made to overcome it, can 
 only be regarded as a defect, and a further proof of the incom- 
 pleteness of Early English Picture glass-paintings, in comparison 
 with Early English architecture and sculpture. It is otherwise 
 with Early English Pattern glass-paintings; they are but a 
 species of mere surface decoration, and their flatness is perfectly 
 consistent with the nature of their design. 
 
 It could easily be shown that all other Gothic Picture glass- 
 paintings disagree with the contemporary architecture in many 
 respects ; but it is unnecessary to pursue the inquiry further to 
 justify the conclusion, that, although Gothic Pattern glass- 
 paintings may be considered to harmonize with Gothic architec- 
 ture, Gothic Picture glass-paintings do so but imperfectly. It 
 of course follows that the modern imitations of the latter, even 
 if they w^ere exact, cannot harmonize with the architecture, 
 since the originals do not. But the observations w^hich I shall 
 now proceed to make on the nature of modern glass will show^ 
 tliat these imitations cannot be exact ; and that all imitations of 
 Gothic glass-paintings, whether patterns or pictures, and more 
 especially those of the earlier styles, will be deficient in that part 
 of harmony which is dependent on the tone and colouring of the 
 work : the imitations of Picture glass-paintings thus failing 
 of the desired harmony on two accounts. 
 
 It has been stated in a former part of this paper, that various 
 changes in the texture of the glass itself took place at various 
 periods in the history of the art, and that the nature of the 
 material is always, to a certain extent, characteristic of the age 
 of the glass-painting. Therefore, in order to make an exact copy 
 of any ancient glass-painting, we must possess either a material 
 identical with that of which it is composed, or something equiva- 
 lent to it. Down to the present time, however, the glass manu- 
 facturers have not succeeded in reproducing a material identical 
 with that even of the sixteenth century, which is less homoge- 
 
96 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 neous, and, consequently, apparently denser in its texture,^ than 
 modern glass. The modern imitations of the still earlier kinds 
 of glass are, as might be expected, still less successful. Every 
 expedient that has yet been tried has produced but a slight 
 approximation to what is required. No material having the 
 porcelain character, richness, and gem-like brilliancy of the 
 glass of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, has yet been 
 made. The modern glass is all too clear and homogeneous in 
 texture, and too uniform in depth or shade of colour. Modern 
 Euby glass is poor in comparison with the rich streaky Kuby 
 glass of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; and the "Kolled" 
 Pot-metal and white glass, being of uniform thickness all over, 
 have none of the richness and vivacity of the ancient Pot-metal 
 and white glass, which, having been blo\ni in a rude inartificial 
 manner, are very irregular in thickness, and, consequently, 
 exhibit corresponding varieties or shades of tint. Thus, it is 
 evident that, until the manufacture of the ancient material is 
 effednalhj revived, — and against this there are obstacles more 
 numerous and formidable than would at first be supposed,^ — 
 modern imitations of ancient painted windows, and especially 
 of those belonging to the earlier styles, must necessarily be more 
 or less faulty. 
 
 A comparison of the modern imitation of an Early English 
 Medallion window, lately put up in Lincoln Cathedral, with the 
 genuine Early English glass remaining in the transept and choir 
 windows, will show the fruitlessness of attempting to reproduce 
 an Early English Picture design in modern glass. In order, no 
 doubt, to correct the thinness of the modern material, and to 
 give it as much as possible the apparent substance of the old, the 
 glass in the modern window I am speaking of has been covered 
 with a coat of Enamel Brown paint : an expedient which, though 
 it perfectly destroys the brilliancy of the glass, fails in its object 
 to impart to the window the requisite depth and solidity. The 
 window is flimsy, as Avell as dull in appearance ; its colours have 
 none of the gravity and gem-like brilliancy of the old ones; 
 
 ^ I use the expression apparent den- glass ; and perhaps to a diflferent kind 
 
 sity, because, in fact, modern glass is of furnace from that now in use. But 
 
 more dense, i.e. specifically heavier, such an entire change of system is 
 
 than old glass. hardly to be expected, when we recol- 
 
 2 Before the ancient material is I'epro- lect how small a quantity of glass, 
 duced, the manufacturer must have compared with what is annually manu- 
 recourse to the ancient mode of pre- factured, is consumed by the glass- 
 paring the materials and colours of the painters. 
 
AND SOU'JHWELL MIXSTER. 97 
 
 aud owing to the highly homogeneous texture of modern glass, 
 which renders it peculiarly unfit for minute mosaics, the little 
 bits of red and blue in this wiudow run together, and form 
 a violet when seen from a little distance. As, however, it mav 
 be objected that this window is by no means a favourable 
 specimen of modern craft, I will refer to another work put 
 up about the same time as the last, in Ely Cathedral (both 
 windows bear date 1847), by 31. Gerente, the French glass- 
 painter before mentioned. In this window also the design and 
 execution of an Early English Medalhou window have been 
 closely imitated, and with better success. In particular, the 
 window is brilliant, the glass not having been much dulled with 
 the Enamel colour, and the blue used in it very closely resembles 
 the ancient in its hue; nevertheless, the miiform depth of the 
 coloured glass, and more especially the thin and flimsy appear- 
 ance of the window, are fatal to its correctness as an imitative 
 work. Affecting to be an Early English Picture wiudow, it 
 whoUy wants the essential characteristic of an Early English 
 Picture window— the grandeur arising from the use of solid, 
 deep, and vivid colouring.^ At Chester Cathecbal, two modern 
 Pictm-e windows have lately been put up ; the one is in imitation 
 of Early Decorated, the other of Perpendicular glass ; but not- 
 withstanding the great difference of then- detail, both windows 
 are immediately perceived to be of the same date, because glass 
 alike in textm-e has been used in the formation of each. 
 
 It is far more easy, however, to notice these defects, tlian 
 to suo-o'est the means bv which similar failures mav be avoided ; 
 and yet it is necessary that attention should be dh-ected to the 
 subject, in order that we may be able to impart to Gothic glass- 
 paintings that harmony with Gothic architecture which is con- 
 sidered an essential requisite in them. 
 
 Haimony, as we have seen, is dependent partly on the nature 
 aud execution of the design, partly and principally on the tone 
 of the colouring. On the former of these sources of harmony 
 
 1 The most favourable place for view- interior of the cathedral, however, the 
 
 iug this window from is in the church- colours appear weak and feeble, as 
 
 yard, through one of the windows of stated in the text, owing to the dila- 
 
 the noi-th transept, whence the colours tion of the pupil which the darkness of 
 
 appear sufficiently deep and strong ; the the place occasions. Of course it fol- 
 
 eye being unable to take hi more than lows, that, if at any time the cathedral 
 
 a small portion of the rays that pass should be rendered darker by the intro- 
 
 through the glass, owing to the con- duction of more painted windows, the 
 
 traction of the pupil caused by the coloui-s of M. Gerente's window will 
 
 glare of the outdoor light. From the apjjear propoi-tionably lighter. 
 
 H 
 
98 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 I shall not make many observations, as it is that which is most 
 within the reach of the modern artist, and in which he may, 
 without much difficulty, succeed, though his ancient predecessor 
 has failed. The succeeding part of this paper will therefore 
 be principally directed to a consideration of the best means of 
 obtaining harmony from the second of these sources. 
 
 The chief difficulty lies in devising some method by which, in 
 a Picture glass-painting (for the object may be more easily 
 accomplished in a white pattern), an effect of colour may be 
 produced that will harmonize with the more gloomy Gothic 
 edifices, such as those of the Early English style. " By colouring," 
 says Sir Joshua Eeynolds, "the first effect of the picture is pro- 
 duced." ^ This remark applies with the utmost force to a glass- 
 painting, of which the colouring is so important a feature that 
 everything else may be considered subordinate to it. We have 
 already seen that the colouring which best accords with the 
 sombre character of Gothic architecture is of a cold tone, and 
 that tints the most solid and intense harmonize best with the 
 darkness of an Early English interior. Yet of the glass which 
 the modern glass-painter must use, one or two sorts only can be 
 said to approximate to the effect of Early English glass in their 
 cold grave hue and substantial appearance. Most of the modern 
 colours, besides being raw, have a warm,^ rather than a cold 
 tone. This is particularly the case with the blue glass. Still I 
 am inclined to think that glass-paintings might be made to 
 harmonize with Gothic building's, even with those of the Early 
 English style, in a greater degree than has hitherto been the 
 case, by the exercise of some care and judgment in making the 
 design, arranging its colours, and executing the work. 
 
 The principle that regulates the colouring of an Early 
 English window, by which all nice and prettily graduated tints 
 are excluded, and distinct uniform and forcible colours only are 
 used, is of itself, by reason of its simplicity, an element of 
 grandeur, which ought to be adopted in a work that aims at 
 solemnity of effect.^ Therefore, in a modern window designed 
 for an Early English building, it would seem preferable to use 
 
 * Fourth Discourse. warmth of colour would, however, have 
 
 2 The warm tone of the colourmg of been unobjectionable, had the painting 
 
 the great south window of the transept been put in a dark building in the 
 
 of Westminster Abbey is a defect, Italian or Palladian style, as St. Paul's 
 
 though, I fear, one that could not by Cathedral. 
 
 any possibility have been avoided in a ^ Reynolds's Fourth Discourse, 
 
 work intended for such a place. The 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 99 
 
 stiff-coloured or white backgrounds for the pictures, than land- 
 scape backgrounds ; for the latter could only be adequately 
 represented by using graduated tints, which would not only 
 destroy the simplicity of the colouring, but necessarily involve 
 a diminution of its depth. So the flesh-colour of the figures 
 should be deep, and their draj)eries consist of stiff simple tints. 
 But whilst adopting generally the mediaeval principle of colour- 
 ing, it will be found necessary to introduce certain modifications 
 in the use and arrangement of individual colours, and some 
 novelties in the design and execution of the picture, in order to 
 compensate as much as possible for the thinness and weakness 
 of modern glass, and produce an effect of depth, as well as 
 brilliancy. 
 
 The principal innovations that seem desirable are, the adop- 
 tion of a broader and less mosaic system of colouring, the use 
 of a greater proportion of white glass, and the employment of 
 shadows far more effective and powerful than are usually met 
 with in an Early English Picture window.^ These (and others 
 of hardly less importance might be mentioned, such as the 
 correct drawing of the human figure and scientific treatment of 
 drapery) may be advocated as improvements on the ancient 
 system ; ^ but their adoption, as a means of producing the 
 desired effect, is rendered necessary by the peculiar texture of 
 modern glass. Any one who has paid attention to the subject 
 must have perceived that modern glass diffuses or spreads its 
 hue laterally, in a much greater degree than tlie glass of the 
 thirteenth century ; and that the confusion of tint arising from 
 this circumstance increases in proportion to the minuteness and 
 pellucidness of the pieces employed. We have seen the ill effect 
 of attempting to correct this diffusion of colour at the expense 
 of the transparency of the glass : the most obvious expedient is 
 to, avoid, as much as possible, the use of such minute mosaics, 
 and to design the window accordingly. The employment of 
 white glass in much greater quantity than is seen in ancient 
 Early English Picture windows is necessary, in order to increase 
 
 1 Even were it possible to obtain notions, such as the necessity of keeping 
 glass exactly like that of the thirteenth glass-painting purposely in an unde- 
 and fourteenth centuries, I should still veloped state, ''lest it should cease to 
 advocate the use of powerful shadows. be the handmaid of Gothic architec- 
 
 2 The propriety of imitating the de- ture/' will probably be exploded in due 
 fective drawing of the mediaeval artists course of time, when the subject is 
 is, I believe, now pretty generally de- better understood. 
 
 nied by its former advocates. Other 
 
 H 2 
 
.100 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDKAL 
 
 by contrast the apparent depth of the modern coloured glass ; 
 which, unlike the glass of the thirteenth century, is not solid 
 enough to withstand the weakening effect on individual tints 
 caused by placing a number of strong colours in juxtaposition, 
 unrelieved with white glass.^ If white glass of a sufficiently 
 green and cold tone is used for this purpose, the grandeur and 
 solemnity of the window is rather increased than diminished by 
 its introduction. In proof, I may refer to the Jesse which 
 occupies the south end of the transept of Stafford Church; 
 a work scarcely inferior to an original example in depth of 
 effect, though a greater proportion of white glass is used in it 
 than would appear in an ancient Early English Jesse, from 
 which its design is borrowed.^ 
 
 Powerful stipple shadows^ in the figures and draperies will 
 materially check the tendency of modern glass to diffuse its tint, 
 without destroying its transparency ; and will also serve to 
 increase the depth and richness of the colouring, and the 
 general solidity and grandeur of the design. Such shadows, 
 when combined with brilliant lights, and confined within due 
 limits of superficial extent, as we find them in Cinquecento 
 glass -paintings, can never, however strong, produce a dull effect; 
 for the brilliancy of the material is shown in the sparkling lights, 
 and is enhanced by the darkness of the shadows. They also 
 promote harmony of effect, and serve to correct the natural 
 spottiness of a Picture glass-painting, by preventing too violent 
 transitions from one colour to another. They also materially 
 conduce to the distinctness of the design, by separating the 
 various objects from each other, and cutting them out from the 
 ground of the picture. It is obvious that the mere use of strong- 
 contrasts of Hght and shade, without diminution of the depth of 
 
 1 The window of the south transept, painting has been attempted), that, 
 
 Westminster Abbey, has white glass had Mr. Nixon done nothing else, it 
 
 enough to have given value to the other would have been sufficient to entitle 
 
 colours, had not its tint been too much him to the respect of those who desire 
 
 subdued by the enamel brown shading, to see the true revival of a neglected 
 
 This, and the want of more powerful and underrated branch of art. I will 
 
 shadows and clear lights, especially in venture to say that this window will 
 
 the larger subjects, seem to be the chief be appreciated in proportion as glass - 
 
 technical defects of the window as a painting becomes better understood, 
 
 glass-painting. Yet such is the supe- ^ q^\^Q -window was painted by Ward 
 
 riority of this work over its coutempo- and Nixon. 
 
 raries, both here and abroad (and it ^ The superiority of stipple to smear 
 
 should be recollected tliat it is the first shadows is shown in the ' Hints on 
 
 English work in which any attempt to Glass-painting,' pp. 249, 28G, 
 carry out a legitimate system of glass- 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MIXSTER. 101 
 
 the local colours, cannot detract from the simplicity of the 
 desio^n : and that strons: outlines may be united \Yith strong: 
 shadows whenever they may be necessary in order to make the 
 execution of the figures harmonize with that of the mere pattern- 
 work. Yet the employment of strong shadows in any Picture 
 glass-painting, and particularly in one designed after an Early 
 English model, has been so pertinaciously objected to, that it 
 seems worth while to examine the grounds of the objection. 
 The most plausible ground of defence for the flatness of medi- 
 aeval Picture glass-paintings is founded on the opinion that, as 
 these works formed part of that system of surface decoration 
 which covered the walls and sculpture with flat patches of bur- 
 nished gold and gaudy colours, they ought to be fiat, in order to 
 harmonize with the flatness of the pictures on the wall : the 
 flatness of the latter being maintained on the ground that it 
 was contrary to the principles of mediaeval art to practise ocular 
 deception. The proof of this last assertion, however, lies on 
 those who make it : and when we perceive that a mediaeval 
 mural picture, unlike a mural diaper pattern, is not wholly 
 devoid of shadow, and that linear perspective is not unfre- 
 quently attempted in it, the inference is that the flatness of the 
 picture has its origin rather in an imperfect and undeveloped 
 state of the art of representation, than in any deliberate inten- 
 tion : an inference which is strengthened by the fact, that this 
 flatness often appears to vary in degi-ee with the skill of the 
 artist as shown in his treatment of the subject in other respects. 
 Assuming, however, the correctness of the opinion above alluded 
 to, it affords an additional reason for discarding flatness from 
 modern Picture glass-paintings. For the mediaeval system 
 of surface decoration no longer existing, a detached part of it 
 (like the imconnected portions of any other whole when deprived 
 of their proper accompaniments) can hardly be expected to 
 please. Flat Picture glass-paintings, disjoiued from the surface 
 decorations of which they are supposed to have formed a part, 
 would stand alone without anything to countenance and har- 
 monize with them. Even if this were not the case, it would be 
 unreasonable to execute modern Picture glass-paintings, which 
 must depend on their on^ti unsupported merits, as if they were to 
 form parts of a whole which has no existence. Flat Picture 
 glass-paintings, according to the opiuion above noticed, will 
 be out of place except in buildings where the walls are stiffly 
 illuminated after the mediaeval fashion. Therefore, if we w^ish 
 to introduce them, we must, in order to be consistent, also 
 illuminate the walls. But modern taste will probably always 
 
102 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 prevent this practice, wliich, though it might have harmonized 
 with the gaudy and glittering costumes of our mediaeval an- 
 cestors, would present too glaring and violent a contrast to the 
 more sober and more elegant colours now in use. 
 
 Another objection which has been urged against the use of 
 strong sliadows in a Picture glass-painting, from a fear that they 
 might diminish the brilliancy of the work, has already been 
 answered ; a third objection to apparent roundness being given 
 to objects in a Picture glass-painting, because calculated to 
 convey an idea of their substantiality, contrary to our pei ception 
 of the fact that the light actually does pass through them, seems 
 unworthy of serious notice, for it strikes at the root of all imita- 
 tion whatever. On the other hand, it is difficult to reconcile the 
 flatness of mediaeval Picture glass-paintings with the relief of the 
 contemporary sculpture, or, perhaps, with any sound principle 
 of taste. Indeed, if it be proper that the conditions of glass- 
 painting should be reduced below the conditions of sculpture, 
 and that its Pictorial productions should continue to be, like the 
 mediaeval examples, little else than flat mosaics, it would always 
 be better to choose for the subject of a glass-painting a mere 
 pattern, rather than a picture ; because a more exact balance 
 and arrangement of colour can be preserved in a mosaic con- 
 sisting of a stiff formal pattern, than in one composed, as a 
 picture, of figures and draperies. 
 
 It will be observed that the foregoing suggestions and recom- 
 mendations, however inconsistent with the practice of making 
 servile copies of ancient Picture glass-paintings, are in no wise 
 opposed to the use of designs founded on their principle. The 
 idea suggested by an Early English Medallion window might 
 be well carried out by treating the medallions strictly as 
 pictures, having stiff-coloured or white grounds. No attempt 
 should be made, as in the original, to represent a landscape 
 background to the picture, either by merely introducing con- 
 ventional objects, according to the practice of the mediaeval 
 artists, or by means of aerial perspective, in conformity with 
 the truer principles of modern art : for the first course would 
 involve an absurdity im worthy of perpetuation, and the light- 
 tinted effect produced by the latter would be opposed to the stiff 
 and solemn colouring of the rest of the window. Each medallion 
 should contain simply a group of figures, relieved with bold 
 shadows, and contrasted in colour to the ground of the panel. 
 The character and arrangement of the figures and draperies 
 might be borrowed, not copied, from the sculpture of the thir- 
 teenth century, which abounds in noble and graceful draped 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 103 
 
 forms, that, without any loss of simplicity, might be perfected 
 by the refinement of modern art. And the importance of the 
 pictures should be fully maintained by making the surrounding 
 ornamental details subordinate to them in all respects. The 
 Early English Figure and Canopy window, and especially the 
 Jesse window, might with similar modifications be made to har- 
 monize with the architecture more completely than the ancient 
 examples. If the former type should be followed, the canopy, 
 which is as much an integral part of the picture as the figure, 
 should be represented as an object covering the figure, and as 
 a niche into which the figure casts a shade. A small amount 
 of shadow might suffice, but enough should be used to insu- 
 late tlie figure as completely as this is done in the sculpture. 
 No Early English designs are, however, more w^orthy of study, 
 certainly none are so well suited to the nature of modern glass 
 as white Pattern windows. The cold tone and substantial 
 appearance of these windows have been well imitated in 
 " Powell's Pressed Glass," in the transept windows of tlie new 
 church at Hackney,^ and more especially in the east window of 
 the south aisle of Stafford Church, the work of Ward and 
 Nixon. Pictures (if inserted into these windows) would have 
 a rich effect, owing to the contrast which the w^hite of the 
 pattern would present to their colouring. 
 
 In like manner, many of the ancient Decorated designs might 
 suggest useful hints to the modern glass-painter. The white 
 Pattern windows could be imitated in the modern material 
 as successfully as the Early English white patterns. The usual 
 design of the ancient Figure and Canopy window would, how- 
 ever, if adopted, require considerable modification to render 
 it satisfactory, owing to the great disproportion which the 
 architectural accessories bear to the figure, by which the latter, 
 instead of being the principal object in the picture, is often 
 rendered the most insignificant. It would be better, in the case 
 of large single figures, to follow another ancient arrangement, 
 and place them on a background of ornamented quarries. In 
 the choir of St. SebakVs Church, Nuremberg, is a late Decorated 
 canopy, representing the interior of an apse, with figures in it, 
 which extends quite across a four-liglited window. Such a 
 canopy, if properly treated, might be rendered highly conducive 
 to the general effect of the picture. Whether its strong cast of 
 colour might not prove too heavy for a mullioyied window^ is a 
 question that cannot be easily determined without trying the 
 
 The design of these windows is not alhided to. 
 
104 PAINTED GLASS IN LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 experiment. It certainly would not be heavier in effect tlian 
 many ancient designs. I consider strong Stipple Shadows, 
 good drawing, and a large quantity of white glass of a cold 
 tone, indispensable to the full effect of a picture founded on the 
 ancient Decorated model. The artist would, I think, do well to 
 avoid in these works a too liberal use of the yellow stain, on 
 account of its tendency to impart a yellowness to the sur- 
 rounding white glass. Many modern windows in which much 
 stain is used, especially those composed of the yellow-tinted 
 " Cathedral Glass," appear at a little distance as if they were 
 wholly yellow. It should be borne in mind that, the stained 
 yellow being rarely, like another colour, surrounded with an 
 outline of considerable strength, there is little to counteract its 
 diffusive tendency. 
 
 It is unnecessary to make any lengthened observations on tlie 
 subject of Picture windows, designed for Perpendicular and 
 Classical edifices. The artist would not fail to borrow, as 
 suitable to the nature of modern glass, the breadth and arrange- 
 ment of colour which is equally displayed in the works both of 
 the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; whilst a careful study 
 of the Cinquecento style would teach him to avoid, by means of 
 strong transparent shadows, the spottiness and indistinctness 
 of Perpendicular Picture glass-paintings, and to produce the 
 most powerful and striking effects with the most flimsy mate- 
 rials. It would be easy, without, of course, using Cinquecento 
 forms, to adopt the Cinquecento improvements on Gothic 
 designs, so as to increase the general effect of the picture by 
 means of its architectural details. A gayer tone of colouring 
 might easily be imparted to glass-paintings intended for Clas- 
 sical buildings ; and in these works, if not in the glass-paintings 
 intended for the later Perpendicular architecture, the use of 
 landscape backgrounds, exhibiting such graduated shades of 
 colour as the modern improvements on the Mosaic system can 
 effect, would not be out of character, except in those cases 
 where, owing to the darkness of the situation, or other circum- 
 stances, a more simple style of colouring would be requisite, and 
 which might involve the use of plain backgrounds to the 
 pictures. In like manner a more severe character could be 
 imparted to the glass-painting in other respects, according to the 
 severity of the architecture. Indeed, severity of style, — that 
 is, the simplicity which suggests no defect, as in Greek art, — is 
 not only attainable in a glass-painting, but seems most in 
 accordance with the principles of the art. The ornamented 
 quarry patterns would be as appropriate now as they ever were 
 
AND SOUTHWELL MINSTER. 
 
 105 
 
 for Perpendicular biiildiDgs, and it would be easy to enrich them 
 when necessary, by the introduction of small coloured pictures, 
 or knots of foliage : whilst " Eound glass," in panes of at least 
 six inches diameter, would be found a clieap, appropriate, and 
 effective material for white Pattern windows, intended for Clas- 
 sical edifices.^ 
 
 The foregoing observations will not have been useless should 
 they merely have the effect of directing attention to a point in 
 general too little regarded in the selection of a painted window 
 — its fitness for the place it is intended to occupy. Of course 
 the mode of execution must depend on the artistic skill of the 
 painter.^ We cannot expect any general improvement in glass- 
 painting to take place so long as considerable patronage is 
 bestowed on unworthy objects ; so long as great countenance 
 is given to works the design and execution of which would not 
 be tolerated in any other branch of art. 
 
 My best thanks are due to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln 
 for granting me free access to the glass in their cathedral, and 
 other assistance which materially facilitated my researches. 
 
 ^ The windows of Michael Angelo's 
 noble design for the church of St. John 
 Baptist, at Florence, are represented as 
 glazed with Round glass. See Jacob de 
 Rubeis, ' Insignium Romae Templo- 
 
 rum,' plate 48. 
 
 2 I presume that the Commissioners 
 on the Fine Ai'ts are not responsible for 
 the execution of the painted windows of 
 the House of Lords. 
 
IV. 
 
 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBUKY. 
 
 From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at 
 Salisbury, 1849. 
 
 ALISBURY CATHEDRAL, like many of our 
 ecclesiastical edifices, affords a far better oppor- 
 tunity of studying ancient painted glass in detail, 
 and learning the conventionalities of design, which 
 are too often supposed to be the sole test of style, 
 than of contemplating it in mass, and accustom- 
 ing the eye to tliose other indications of date 
 which are to be found in its colour and general 
 appearance. The inquirer who proceeds to Salisbury must there- 
 fore be content for the most part with an examination of little 
 else than fragments, and to consume much time in the laborious 
 process of unravelling patchwork made up of glass of different 
 designs and different dates. 
 
 The most woful destruction of- the painted glass appears to 
 have taken place during Mr. Wyatt's " restoration " of the cathe- 
 dral ; when, in the words of my informant, " whole cartloads of 
 glass, lead, and other rubbish were removed from the nave and 
 transepts, and shot into the town-ditch, then in course of being 
 filled up ; whilst a good deal of similar rubbish was used to level 
 the ground near the chapter-house."^ The smwiving frag- 
 
 ^ The latter part of this statement 
 was confirmed by Mr, William Ranger, 
 glazier to the cathedral, in the employ 
 of Mr. Fisher, the clerk of the works, 
 — ^who informed me that he possessed 
 the head of a figure which some years 
 ago he saw dug up near the chapter- 
 house, along with other fragments of 
 painted glass, by some workmen em- 
 ployed in making holes for some 
 scaffold-poles. Mr. Ranger, who, since 
 1819, has been employed in repairing 
 the cathedral windows, assisted in 
 
 placing the greater part of the painted 
 glass in its present situation. The in- 
 formation I have obtained from him has 
 therefore been particularly valuable, 
 since it has enabled me to state posi- 
 tively that such and such glass was 
 brought from the chapter-house, or 
 from elsewhere, I may add, that in 
 every instance I found his information 
 was corroborated by the character of 
 the glass. I take this opportunity of 
 acknowledging also the kind assistance 
 I have derived from Mr. Fisher, and 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 107 
 
 ments,^ it seems, were suffered to retain their original position 
 in the building until about thirty years ago, when the majority 
 were collected together as they now appear, — an act which, 
 however praiseworthy in itself, as tending perhaps to preserve 
 the glass from utter destruction, has greatly increased the 
 difQculty of analysing the fragments, and describing them in- 
 telligibly. 
 
 With a view to render this paper as illustrative as possible of 
 the different styles of painted glass, I propose to notice first the 
 oldest remains in Salisbury, viz. the original glass of the cathe- 
 dral and chapter-house ; and then, successively, the Decorated 
 remains in St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury, and the Perpen- 
 dicular glass in the hall of John Halle ; concluding with some 
 remarks on the later and modern glass in the cathedral. 
 
 Mr. Osmond, a geutleman in Mr. 
 Fisher's office, in the course of my in- 
 vestigations. 
 
 1 At the time of the great destruction 
 of the Salisbury glass, some fragments 
 were preserved by being transferred to 
 the windows of Grately Church, Hants. 
 I am under a deep obligation to the 
 Rev. C. Dodson and W. Gale, Esq., the 
 incumbent and churchwarden of Grate- 
 ley, for having, during the recent re- 
 pairs of their church, forwai'ded these 
 remains for my inspection. They con- 
 sist princijially of a few varieties of or- 
 namental borders : some ornamental 
 scroll-work, similar in character to that 
 of the ''Jesse "in the west window of 
 Salisbury Cathedral ; a small fragment 
 of a medallion, representing the Annun- 
 ciation (of this, only a portion of the 
 angel remains, with a scroll on his head, 
 inscribed gabriei., in Lombardic cha- 
 racters) ; and a very fine circular medal- 
 lion, set in a square of ornamental work, 
 representing the martyrdom of St. 
 Stephen. The saint, habited as a 
 deacon, is in the act of falling, with his 
 hands in an attitude of praj^er, dead to 
 the ground. A man immediately be- 
 hind appears to communicate, with an 
 air of savage exultation, the fatal event 
 to another miscreant, who is approach- 
 ing (as I think is indicated by the frag- 
 ments that remain of this figui-e) with 
 his mantle filled with stones, and seems 
 disappointed at being too late. Both 
 men have decidedly Jewish physiogno- 
 
 mies. The group is delineated with 
 great spirit. Below is the following 
 inscription, in Lombardic characters, 
 
 STEPHANVS ORANS EXPIRAT. 
 
 The saint's head is painted on a piece of 
 light ruby glass. This mode of indi- 
 cating the effect of wounds is not un- 
 usual. There is an instance of it in a 
 medallion of the thirteenth century, at 
 West Horsley Church, Surrey, repre- 
 senting the angel rescuing St. Catherine 
 from the punishment of the wheel. 
 The heads of two of the executioners, 
 who seem to have been struck down by 
 the angel, are painted on red glass. 
 The head of St. Stephen in a window 
 of Sefonds Church, dated 1524, appears 
 from the description, and an uncoloured 
 engraving of it given in M. Arnaud's 
 ' Voyage archeologique et pittoresque 
 dans le Departement de I'Aube et dans 
 I'ancien Diocese de Troyes,' to be 
 painted on a piece of white glass 
 streaked with ruby. The description 
 is as follows : '' Celui de ces vitraux 
 que nous avons fait dessiner repi-esente 
 le martyre de Saint Etienne. On voit 
 ce saint vetu en diacre, la tete inondee 
 du sang qui jaillit de ses blessures " 
 (p. 228). 
 
 All these fragments at Grateley are 
 of the same date as the Jesse in the 
 west window of Salisbury Cathedi-al ; 
 from which it may be inferred that they 
 belonged to the cathedral, not to the 
 chapter-house. 
 
108 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 The original glass of the cathedral and chapter-house — by 
 which I mean that which is coeval with these buildings — is valu- 
 able as belonging to diiferent periods of the Early English style ; 
 the oldest specimen being perhaps as early as 1240, and the 
 most recent not earlier than perhaps 1270 or 1280. Part of this 
 glass belonged to the cathedral and part to the chapter-house. 
 It is now all mixed together in the cathedral windows ; but I 
 have succeeded in distinguishing the different portions, and hope 
 that I may be equally successful in enabling others to distinguish 
 them. 
 
 Of these ancient remains only two specimens retain their 
 original situation, viz. a part of tlie glazing of the second and 
 fourth transept, counting from the north of the great north tran- 
 sept. The rest are collected in the west triplet of the nave ; in 
 the west window of each aisle of the nave ; in the east window 
 of each aisle of the choir ; in the lower south triplet of the small 
 south transept ; and in the two centre lights of the upper tier of 
 the south windows of the great south transept. A few other 
 fragments are preserved in the glazier's room attached to the 
 cathedral. The subjects consist chiefly of ornamental patterns ; 
 but these are the remains of a " Stem of Jesse," as well as some 
 medallion pictures, borders, and shields of arms. 
 
 The remains of the Stem of Jesse are contained in the lower 
 part and sides of the central light of the northern triplet of the 
 nave.^ They were removed from a wdndow of the great north 
 transept, in which they had been inserted in the course of 
 repairs. Another portion, no longer existing, is represented in 
 the 79th plate of Carter's ^ Ancient Architecture,' fig. Q, and is 
 there called " ancient glazing in the nave ;" from which I infer 
 that it was in one of the aisle windows of the nave, which, not 
 improbably, was the original situation of the Jesse. The Jesse 
 appears, from the existing fragments and from the plate in 
 Carter, to have been designed according to the usual type of the 
 period ; and to have consisted of a vine, whose ramifications 
 formed a central series of ovals containing representations of our 
 Lord and His principal ancestors, and supported on offshoots 
 from the ovals, the figures of prophets, patriarchs, and other 
 attendants. 
 
 ^ The window, previously to the pre- Cathedral,' and in a view of the west 
 
 sent glass being placed in it, was filled end of the cathedral in Dods worth's 
 
 with a bad ornamental pattern, the gift ' History of Salisbury.' Some small 
 
 of the Rev. Benson Earle. Of this the pieces of the glass are worked into the 
 
 general outline is preserved in the 5th west triplet and other windows of the 
 
 plate of Britton's * History of Salisbury cathedral. 
 
PLATE I. 
 
 Phikp Delai-ao ae,, del . from a dr awing iy C Winston ^ 
 
 SALISBURY 
 
 inceiit Brooks 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 109 
 
 Two only of the ovals remain. They are on each side of the 
 large Cinquecento picture of a bishop entlirouedj which is so 
 conspicuous an object in the lower half of the central light, and 
 nearly in a line with the head of this figure. In the southern 
 oval is represented our Saviour^ enthroned, holding a book in 
 one hand, the other being raised in benediction. The head is 
 that of a middle-aged person ; it possesses much of the Byzantine 
 character, and is smTounded with a cruciferous aureole. The 
 stigmata are not shown in the hands and feet. 
 
 In the northern oval is represented a female seated, and in 
 an attitude of adoration. I presume the figure is intended for 
 the Blessed Yii-gin. 
 
 The most perfect remains of that part of the composition which 
 constitutes the space outside the ovals are on the south side 
 of the central light, near the bottom. They consist of foliaged 
 scrolls, which support an unnimbed full-leng-th figure holding a 
 blank label — the usual personification of a prophet — and an 
 angel. Betw^een these figures is a small bust, which issues from 
 the termination of one of the foliaged scrolls, and may be sup- 
 posed to represent a prophet or patriarch. Similar fragments of 
 foliaged scroll-work and figures may be seen higher up, on the 
 south side of the light ; and higher still, in a line with the large 
 circle almost at the top of the light, are two demi-attendant 
 figures, which, from their size and altitude, I conclude originally 
 flanked the highest oval of the Jesse. A good deal of the border 
 originally belonging to the light that contained the Jesse is used 
 as a border to the central light of the triplet. A portion of this 
 border is given in the first plate that accompanies this paper : 
 see fig. 2? 
 
 ^ I presume that this is correct. In sitting on a throne, without the stig- 
 
 the " Jesse " in the east window of mata, is given in No. 24 of the ' Archoeo- 
 
 "Westwell Church, Kent, the topmost logical Journal,' p. 412. Other examples 
 
 object is the Holy Dove ; the second, may be seen in the plates to the paper 
 
 a' similar representation to that in the on St. Ethelwold's Benedictioual, in the 
 
 text, of one of the Persons of the Holy 24th volume of the ' Archaeologia,' &c. 
 
 Trinity, and which likei^-ise is without The centre figure of our Saviour in the 
 
 the stigmata. The third subject is the north rose of Lincoln Cathedral is un- 
 
 Vu'gin Mary, unaccompanied by the fortunately so mutilated that it is im- 
 
 Divine Infant. A distinction is perhaps possible to say whether or not it had 
 
 taken between the representation of our the stigmata. Had the figm-e been 
 
 Saviour as Judge of the world, — when perfect, it would have thrown light on 
 
 He is, I believe, invariably represented the subject. See an account of this 
 
 with the stigmata, in allusion perhaps window in the Lincoln volume of the 
 
 to Zech. xii. 10, Rev. i. 7, — and when Proceedings of the Archaeological lusti- 
 
 Ile is represented either as sitting in tate. 
 
 His kingdom, or else in His human '^ The illustrations which originally 
 
 capacity. An instance of our Saviour accompanied this memoii' are mentioned 
 
110 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBUKY. 
 
 The whole Jesse is on a ruby ground, the colour of which is 
 extremely rich and intense ; the main stem is white, and formed 
 of short lengths of foliage, each terminating in a trefoil or 
 cinquefoil, according to the ordinary convention of the thirteenth 
 century. The offshoots are of the same character as the parent 
 stem ; but some of the leaves at the termination of the scrolls 
 are of different colours. Small bunches of grapes are occasion- 
 ally introduced. The attendant figures are tall and slim ; the 
 heads have a certain classical character, and bear considerable 
 resemblance to the specimen given in the ' Hints on Glass-paint- 
 ing,' plate 34, fig. 2 ; which is copied from a contemporary Jesse 
 in Westwell Church, Kent. 
 
 All the draperies are full of small folds, expressed by outliues 
 so strong and black as almost to render the use of broader and 
 softer shadows unnecessary. The colouring of every part of 
 the design is rich, deep, and vivid. The blue, which is of the 
 peculiar grey though rich hue common at this period,^ and 
 the flesh-colour, are of strong tint. The white glass is of a 
 greenish-blue hue ; it is but little affected by the atmosphere, 
 and, on the whole, is not quite so deep as the rather later white 
 glass taken from the chapter-house, and which is now in the 
 west triplet. The date of the Jesse is certainly in the first half 
 of the thirteenth century ; it may be placed as early as 1240. 
 
 Of the medallion pictures to which I have alluded, two appear, 
 from many particulars, to be coeval with the Jesse. They are 
 inserted beneath the two ovals, in a line nearly with the feet of 
 the Cinquecento bishop. The south medallion represents the 
 
 in a note to this passage, as a first Early English blue glass that I have 
 attempt with the " anastatic process," hitherto met with, is in the window 
 and a wish is expressed that they had v/hich the late M. Gerente first put up 
 been less rough. The remarks there in Ely Cathedral. In his second win- 
 made on them do not apply to the dow he is not more successful than his 
 illustrations accompanying the memoir English contemporaries ; the same re- 
 in the present vokime, which are new mark equally applies to all his brother's 
 lithographs. work that I have seen. I fear that our 
 1 I am persuaded that the peculiar glass-works are on too extended a scale 
 tint of the early English blue pot-metal to render it worth their proprietors' 
 glass, noticed in the text, principally while to make glass fit for glass-paint- 
 arises from the green hue of the white ing purposes, and that no advance in 
 glass that forms its base. It will be this respect is to be expected till the 
 found that some kinds of modern blue smaller men take the matter up. An 
 glass may be given the precise tint of inquiry into the nature of the colouring 
 the old, by placing a piece of early material of ancient blue glass has long 
 English white glass behind them. The engaged my attention; but my re- 
 nearest approach to the colour— cer- searches are still incomplete, 
 tainly not to the depth of effect — of 
 
PAIXTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. Ill 
 
 Angel appearing to Zacharias in the Temple ; the north, the 
 Adoration of the Magi. These medallions were brought from 
 the same window as the remains of the Jesse. Two other 
 medallions of the thirteenth century are inserted in the west 
 triplet ; but they seem to be French, and possibly w^ere brought 
 from Normandy with some of the later pictures now used to fill 
 up the lights. One is the small circular panel, containing two 
 figures, that is placed in the centre light, a little above the oval 
 in which is represented the Blessed Yirgin. It appears to be of 
 the last half of the thirteenth century. The other is a circle 
 of larger size inserted near the top of the northern light of the 
 triplet. There is nothing in any of these medallions that calls 
 for particular notice. The figures are according to the style of 
 the period, and the groups are, as usual, plain and distinct, 
 owing to their simple composition and the manner in which the 
 individual figures are cut out and insulated by the surrounding 
 coloured ground of the panel. Modern glass-painters in their 
 imitations of Early English medallions are too apt to neglect 
 the simplicity of the ancient arrangement, and to make their 
 own groups confused and indistinct. It must, however, be ad- 
 mitted that there are *' authorities " in their favour, as in the 
 case of medallions representing the Ascension or the Day of 
 Pentecost, in which the complication of the group and want 
 of relief through the absence of broad shadows cause indistinct- 
 ness, and create a doubt whether the ancient medallions in 
 which distinctness is observable Avere designed with a view to 
 that quality, or merely in accordance with the prevailing taste 
 for simple compositions, which is equally exemplified in illumi- 
 nations and drawings intended for the closest inspection. 
 
 The rest of the medallion pictures are of a somewhat later 
 date than the Jesse. They were all removed from the windows 
 of the chapter-house, and are placed in the west triplet of the 
 nave and in the west Avindows of the nave aisles. From their 
 style of execution I conclude that they are not earlier than 
 1270. The principal subject is a large circle almost at the top 
 of the centre light of the Avest triplet, Avhicli contains two figures, 
 a bishop and a king (Edw. Confessor ?), under an arcliAvay. The 
 panel Avas removed from the middle of the large octofoil of one 
 of the Avindows of the chapter-house. On comjDaring this circle 
 Avith the Jesse and the two contemporary medallions, some 
 remarkable differences in the draAving of the figures and texture 
 of the glass will appear. In particular, I may mention the cha- 
 racter of the eyes and eyebroAvs of the figures. Their heads 
 
112 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBUKY. 
 
 somewhat resemble the example given in the ' Hints on Glass- 
 painting,' plate 37, fig. 1. The flesh-colour is much lighter 
 than that used in the Jesse, as is also the blue ground of the 
 plane, though this has a rich appearance. 
 
 The next remains in point of importance are two large 
 elongated quatrefoil panels, each containing an ecclesiastical 
 figure under an archway, which are inserted in each side of the 
 centre light of the triplet, immediately below a Cinquecento 
 representation of the Crucifixion, which forms (reckoning from 
 the top) the third principal object in the centre of the window. 
 These quatrefoils were removed from the largest spandrils of 
 some of the windows of the chaj)ter-house. In drawing, execu- 
 tion, and general character, they entirely resemble the large 
 circle which has just been described. Another quatrefoil, like 
 the last, but containing the figure of a regal person, lies in the 
 glazier's room attached to the cathedral. It was likewise re- 
 moved from the spandril of one of the chapter-house windows. 
 
 The remaining medallions are ten small circles, four of which 
 are inserted in the upper part of the lower lights of the west 
 windows of the aisles of the nave ; the rest are placed in the 
 centre light of the west triplet. These circles were all removed 
 from the centres of tlie quatrefoil of some of the chapter-house 
 windows. Each circle contains a demi-figure of an angel issuing 
 from a cloud ; and it would seem that these angels originally 
 formed part of some subject from the Eevelations, or perhaps 
 the Last Judgment. Some of the' angels point upwards with the 
 hand, and use encouraging gestures ; others carry a book in one 
 hand. One bears a long napkin (an emblem of our Lord's 
 Passion) ; another holds a palm-branch and crown ; a third, a 
 book in one hand and a crescent in the other. In character and 
 execution they exactly resemble the other subjects taken from 
 the chapter-house. 
 
 Six shields of arms in a perfect condition, and a seventh, of 
 which but little, if any, of the original glass exists, are placed at 
 the bottom of the lights of the west triplet. The panels in 
 which they are inserted are made up of fragments, and the 
 crowns above the shields are mostly of Perpendicular date. These 
 shields were removed from the chapter-house; and it may be 
 inferred from the plate in Carter's ' Ancient Architecture,' before 
 alluded to, that they were placed — with another coat now lost, 
 but which is represented in that plate — in pairs, side by side, in 
 the four lower liglits of the east window of the chapter-house. 
 It is most probable that the shields were arranged in a line just 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 113 
 
 beneath the spring of the heads of the lights. They have every 
 appearance of being of the same date as the rest of the glass 
 from the chapter-house. 
 
 The important aid to be derived from heraldry in seeking a 
 date is well known to every antiquary ; I shall therefore per- 
 haps be excused if I enter somewhat fully into the question of 
 the probable ownership of these arms, though I admit tliere is 
 too much uncertainty as to what other shields (if any) there may 
 have been in the chapter-house windows to warrant any confident 
 conclusion, from this species of evidence alone, as to the precise 
 time of the execution of the arms, and of the glass with which 
 they were originally associated. 
 
 The existing arms are : — 1. England ; gules, three lions passant 
 guardant, or. 2. France ; azure, seme of fleurs-de-lis, or. 3. 
 Paly of eight, or and gules, which I do not hesitate to assign to 
 Provence ; for though the arms of Provence may be admitted to 
 be properly or, four pallets, gules, as they appear on the wall of 
 the south aisle of Westminster Abbey, yet this very coat, Paly 
 of eight, or and gules, occurs in a window in York IMinster, 
 associated with others that leave no doubt of its bavins: been 
 intended for Provence, and also in the east window of the clear- 
 stor}% Westminster Abbey. 4. Plantagenet Earl of Cornwall ; 
 argent, a lion rampant, gules, crowned or, within a bordure sable 
 besante. 5. Clare Earl of Gloucester ; or, three chevrons gules. 
 And 6. Bigod Earl of Norfolk ; or, a cross gules. There are also 
 some pieces of glass very like Bezants inserted in a modern blue 
 bordure of the " made-up " shield before mentioned, and which 
 consists of a sixteenth-century imp, on a ground of white glass, of 
 the same date as that belonging to the chapter-house. These 
 Bezants may have formed part of a seventh original shield ; and 
 if so, in all probability, it was a second coat of Plantagenet Earl 
 of Cornwall, but differenced with a label. Besides these heraldic 
 remains, there appears in Carter's plate another coat as before 
 mentioned, viz. Warren ; cheeky or and azure. 
 
 The arms of England may safely be assumed to be those of 
 Henry III. or Edward I., and Provence was the paternal coat of 
 Eleanor, the queen of Henry III., who survived him, and died 
 in 1291. The arms of France are probably to be referred to St. 
 Louis, who married the eldest sister of Queen Eleanor, and died 
 in 1270, and whose shield was carved on the wall of tlie north 
 aisle of Westminster Abbey, with his name, " S. Ludovicus Rex 
 Francie," inscribed above. The coat of Plantagenet Earl of 
 Cornwall was borne bv Richard Earl of Cornwall and Kine: of 
 
114 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 the Komans, the brother of Henry III., who died in 1271. And 
 if this coat was repeated, the second must have been that of his 
 son Edmund, who succeeded him, and died in 1300. Ckre was 
 the coat of Gilbert de Clare, Earl of Glloucester, who had married 
 a niece of Henry III., viz. a daugliter of his half-brother, Guy 
 Count of Angouleme, son of Queen Isabella by her second mar- 
 riage, and who died in 1295. Warren was that of John Earl of 
 Warren and Surrey, who had married a half-sister of Henry III., 
 and died in 1304. The remaining coat, or, a cross gules, was 
 that of Koger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, whose mother was one of 
 the co-heiresses of the Marshals Earls of Pembroke, and who, 
 after her death, became Earl Marshal of England in or about 
 1245, and died in 1269 or 1270 ; or else that of his nephew 
 Roger, who succeeded him in the earldom and the office of 
 marshal. Neither of these two noblemen seems to have been 
 more nearly allied to the royal family than by a mother and 
 sister of the mother of Roger the uncle, having respectively 
 married a sister and mother of Henry III. 
 
 Now, judging from these several coats, — and it is by no means 
 clear that there were ever any others in the Avindows of the 
 chapter-house, — they indicate a period of a few years before and 
 after the accession of Edward I. in 1272, as that within Avhich it 
 is likely this glass was executed, and particularly if there really 
 were two coats of the Plantagenets Earls of Cornwall. 
 
 It may possibly be thought that the arms of Erance may have 
 referred to Margaret, the second queen of Edward I., whom he 
 married in 1299 ; but that could hardly be the case, if there 
 were two shields with the arms of Plantagenet Earls of Corn- 
 wall, as Earl Richard died in 1271 ; and even if there was only 
 one shield with those arms, the occurrence of the arms of Pro- 
 vence is unfavourable to that supposition. 
 
 The arms or, a cross gules, which I have attributed, and I 
 believe correctly, to Roger Bigod Earl of Norfolk, may seem to 
 create a difficulty, in consequence of the arms of the Marshals 
 Earls of Pembroke — per pale or and vert, a lion rampant gules 
 — having been assumed and used on seals for some purposes 
 by him after he became Earl Marshal ; and in consequence of 
 Vincent, in his ' Errors of Brooke,' p. 340, having stated, in 
 contradiction of what Brooke had said of their having been used 
 by him for the purposes of the marshalship only, that they were 
 used in donations, covenants, &c., and not in matters of the 
 marshalship at all. But I would submit that this statement 
 of Vincent is evidently too strong ; for though he might have 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 115 
 
 known of a seal with those arms being affixed to donations and 
 covenants, and he might not have met with any instance of its 
 being employed in matters relating to the marshalship, yet he 
 could not know that it was not so used at all ; nor does it follow 
 that the earl, after he was marshal, used these arms only. In 
 fact, these aims, or a cross gules, were carved in stone, and 
 painted amongst the series of shields on the wall of the north 
 aisle of AVestminster Abbey, and inscribed, "Kogerus Bigod 
 Comes Norfolcie :" and it is evident that those shields must 
 have been executed several years after Earl Koger became Earl 
 Marshal ; and indeed, in all probability, but a few years before 
 the date which I have assigned to this glass. Unfortunately 
 the seal of Earl Koger the nephew, affixed to the Barons' letter 
 to the Pope in 1301, has no arms at all, but only his name and 
 title ; but it is apparent, from what is stated by jMilles and 
 Brooke, that Hugh Bigod, father of the elder Earl Roger, sealed 
 sometimes with a lion passant, and sometimes with tliis cross ; 
 and therefore there is no improbability of these arms being those 
 of Roo-er Bis^od Earl of Norfolk, thouo-h he may have sometimes 
 sealed with the arms of marshal. I am aware that this coat was 
 borne at a later period by the De Burghs Earls of Ulster ; but 
 no one of them appears to have been connected with the royal 
 family, or to have had any important place in this country till 
 about 1310, when John de Burgh married Elizabeth de Clare, 
 daughter of Joan of Acre. On the whole, therefore, it must be 
 evident that the heraldry in this glass agrees very satisfactorily 
 with the date w^hich I have assigned to it on other grounds. 
 
 The ornamental patterns belonging to the cathedral and to 
 the chapter-house next demand our attention. The majority of 
 these patterns are of painted glass ; but there are a few which 
 may be called Geometrical Patterns, in which the design is ex- 
 pressed solely by the lead-work used in the construction of the 
 window. The principal remains of the painted patterns, of 
 which there are between twenty and thii'ty varieties, are in the 
 west windows of the aisles of the nave, in the east windows of 
 the aisles of the choir, in the lowest triplet of the small south 
 transept, and in the two upper south lights of the great south 
 transept. Some fragments are inserted in the west triplet of the 
 nave. 
 
 These patterns form a series varying in date from that of the 
 Jesse to that of the shields of arms in the west triplet. The 
 earlier patterns are distinguishable principally by the drawing of 
 
 I 2 
 
^IQ PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 the foliage ; the scrolls of which are in general less twisted, and 
 the lobe of the leaf, as compared with the stalk, is somewhat 
 smaller than in the later examples. The cross-hatching (making, 
 of course, due allowance for patterns designed for more distant 
 situations) is in general coarser in the earlier specimens; whilst 
 the glass of the later patterns, in which cross-hatching is used, is 
 for the most part of a yellower hue than the glass of the earlier 
 patterns. The latest patterns, including all those belonging to 
 the chapter-house, want the cross-hatched ground. It is, how- 
 ever, impossible to describe exactly the minute diiferences on 
 which the supposition as to the date of the different patterns 
 rests ; it is only by the eye that they can be appreciated. 
 
 The patterns, though various in design, exhibit in a greater or 
 less degree a principle of composition almost peculiar to Early 
 English glass, which seems to have been suggested by the idea 
 of forming a rich and complicated pattern by arranging, in strata 
 or layers, a number of plane figures or panels, in such a manner 
 that the panels composing each layer might overlap and partially 
 conceal those beneath. By way of illustrating this principle, I 
 have given, in Plate I., fig. 1, a rough sketch of a pattern now 
 in the east window of the north aisle of the choir, and which, 
 though belonging to the chapter-house, exemplifies the system 
 in a more striking manner than perhaps any of the earlier pat- 
 terns. It will be seen, on examination, that the pattern is com- 
 posed of a number of panels. Each panel has a well-defined 
 border ; and the area of the panel- is covered with an ornament 
 exclusively appropriated to it. The smallest panels merely have 
 a narrow edging, and a quatrefoil, or some such ornament, 
 within ; the larger panels are ornamented with foliaged scroll- 
 works, the ramifications of which do not overstep the limits of 
 the border of the panel, nor extend from one panel into another ; 
 by which the idea that each panel is a distinct superficies is sus- 
 tained. A reference to Plate II., fig. 1, which gives the analysis 
 of this pattern, will render the foregoing description more intel- 
 ligible. In this plate, A denotes the ground or foundation ol 
 the window; B, a quatrefoil, which, with seventeen similar 
 panels, some of which are only partially shown in the diagram, 
 forms the 1st layer or plane of ornament; C is a circular panel, 
 which, with seventeen others, constitutes the 2nd plane of orna- 
 ment ; D is a nearly square, though really octagonal panel,^ 
 
 ^ The pattern being slightly elongated, in ordex' to fill up a particular opening, 
 has rendered this form of panel necessary. 
 
PLATE TI 
 
 .ilip Delamotte.del frcir. drawings BjC. Winston 
 
 SALISBURY 
 
 •X ;»r,i 3rc.- 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 117 
 
 whicli, with three others, forms the 3rd plane of ornament ; E is 
 a circular panel, which, with three others, forms the 4th plane 
 of ornament ; F is a panel similar to D, which, with two others, 
 forms the 5th plane of ornament ; G is a circular panel like E, 
 which, with two others, forms the 6th plane of ornament ; H is 
 a circular panel, which, with two others, forms the 7th plane of 
 ornament ; I is a circular panel, which, with two others, forms 
 the 8th plane of ornament ; K K are quadrangular and circular 
 panels, constituting the 9th plane of ornament ; L indicates the 
 border of the window, which, as in the head of the light it cuts 
 the rest of the design, must be taken to constitute the 10th plane 
 of ornament. 
 
 It is interesting to trace the progressive changes in the style 
 of ornamental patterns. Without venturing to assert that the 
 system just described was exclusively used at the earliest period, 
 I may safely state that, in general, a deviation from it betokens, 
 at least in the glass of this country, a lateness of date.^ Thus, 
 in the Five Sisters at York, which are carefully figured in 
 Browne's * History of York Cathedral,' and whose date is pro- 
 bably not much earlier than 1260, although the before-mentioned 
 principle is in great measure preserved, it is occasionally violated 
 by the ornamental scroll-work breaking from the area of a panel 
 through the border, and extending its ramifications beyond it, 
 over other parts of the design. The result is to impair, if not 
 destroy, the idea of the panel's being an individual superficies, 
 
 * The principle of ornameut by means appropriated to the same chapter-house 
 
 of layers of panels, described in the pattern (furnished in the plate with a 
 
 text, is not fanciful, as might at first be cross - hatched ground) which I have 
 
 supposed. I have long ago remarked sketched in the first plate that accom- 
 
 it in a great variety of examples; and I panics this paper, fig. 1. In the French 
 
 believe it is only once violated, and work many of the foliaged scrolls are 
 
 then in a trifling degree, in the Salis- also erroneously represented in relief, 
 
 bury patterns. The instance to which by thickening, contrary to the fact, one 
 
 I allude is in one of the lights of the of the ovitliues of the scroll. There are 
 
 south triplet of the small south transept, other minor inaccuracies in these and 
 
 The following plates may be referred other engravings of the MonognqMe, 
 
 to in illustration of it : Monographie de showing that the plates of this work, 
 
 la Catkedrale dc Buurges, plate, etude 11, however magnificent, and useful to those 
 
 in which two of the Salisbury patterns who have seen the glass, are not to be 
 
 are represented; Grisailles D, in which implicitly trusted. See other specimens 
 
 four more are given ; and Grisailles E, of Early English patterns, in Lyson's 
 
 in which six other examples are en- ' Bucks,' plate facing p. 488 ; in the 
 
 graved. Many of the patterns iu this * Inquiry into the Difference of Style 
 
 plate are misrepi-esented in having observable in ancient Painted Glass,' 
 
 cross-hatched grounds. The border plates 5, 6, 8, and 10; and in Browne's 
 
 sketched in Tlate I., fig 2, of the present ' History of York Cathedral,' plates 61, 
 
 paper, is in the Grisailles E, fig. ;^, mis- 63, 65, 67, and 69. 
 
\m^ 
 
 ab;!<«^^M 
 
 
 f^ 
 
 
 ^^^^K 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^QJll^M' 
 
 (^^^^^ 
 
 f^^ 
 
 ^S^^^^^ 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 te*N 
 
 i^^^^^M 
 
 ^m^ vAli'i'^wB^Sr/ <!5^2^>24Hi 
 
 H^^l^^ 
 
 ^"M 
 
 P^^^^^^^^^r 
 
 (^I^^M 
 
 i^p^ 
 
 ^^l^^^^^W 
 
 ^^^^ 
 
 ^4 
 
 ^^^^^^P^ 
 
 -_j^w-*^ _^^^m 
 
 ^-M^N^ 
 
 .<^v.^^^^^^ 
 
 - 
 
 25^^." 
 
 ■ ■■■■■■■ 
 
 
 HuKpDelaxnoiLe.dei irom. or awings by C. Winston 
 
 Si! 'SBURY 
 
 Tmcent Brooks , 
 
TAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 119 
 
 Beyerley Minster' in the York volume of the Archseological 
 Institute, of which, for facility of reference, I have given a 
 tracing in Plate I., fig. 6. W^ may also recogiiise the principle 
 of intersecting planes of ornament as well in those cases where 
 an entire picture in painted glass extends beyond the Ihuits of 
 a single liglit, and is actually severed by the muUions of a 
 window, as in those where the subject rather than the picture is 
 cut by the mullions, it being composed of separate individual 
 parts, which occupy the spaces between the mullions without 
 beins: touched by them. Of the former arranaement there are 
 many instances in early Decorated glass at Cologne, where 
 some of the figures even are cut by the mullions, and elsewhere ; 
 and very numerous instances in later glass. Of the latter, the 
 Martyrdom of St. Sebastian in the early Decorated glass of 
 Bristol Cathedral, and tlie very common subject of the Cruci- 
 fixion, with the attendant Mary and John, in glass of all dates, 
 afford sufficient examples. 
 
 The painted ornamental patterns of the cathedral and 
 chapter-house are principally composed of white glass, colour 
 being sparingly inti-oduced in the borders and centres of the 
 panels. The white glass in some of the later patterns belonging 
 to the cathedral is of a dusky yellow hue; in the majority, 
 however, of the patterns it is of a cold though rich sea-green 
 hue. To the texture and hue of the glass these patterns owe 
 their substantial and solemn appearance, which makes them 
 harmonize with the character of the architecture, and with the 
 picture glass-paintings that are coeval with them. The local 
 colour of the white glass is, except in the dusk of the evening, 
 less strikingly apparent on a close than on a distant view. 
 Thus the ancient windows, unlike the modern copies in the 
 great south transept, are in great measure independent for rich- 
 ness of the pattern painted on the glass ; for when the pattern 
 itself is lost in distance, the local colour of the material shows 
 itself the more distinctly. 
 
 Much of the foliaged scroll-work used in these patterns is of 
 great beauty ; one of the best specimens is perhaps afforded 
 by the pattern in the west window^ of the north aisle of the 
 nave. 
 
 It is impossible to say whether or not all these pattern 
 windows originally had ornamented borders. If the glass 
 slightly indicated^ in the 26th plate of Britten's * History of 
 Salisburv Cathedral ' was then in its original position, it would 
 
120 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBUIIY. 
 
 afford ground for supposing that some of the patterns were 
 separated from the stone-work only by a plain narrow strip of 
 white glass ; the small proportion of borders in existence, as 
 compared with the number of the patterns, seems somewhat to 
 countenance this supposition. There is but one border, besides 
 that of the Jesse, coeval with the older patterns. A sketch of 
 it is given in Plate I. fig 2. It is now in the south light of the 
 west triplet, mingled with a later border from the chapter- 
 house. I think it may be identified with fig. B in Carter's 
 plate, which is there designated as a " border from the nave." 
 The borders of the patterns in the east windows of the choir 
 aisles, and the west windows of the nave aisles, were added at 
 the same time that the j)atterns were removed to these situa- 
 tions. The fleurs-de-lis on a blue ground, which are inserted in 
 the border of the west window of the south aisle of the nave, 
 were taken from another window of the cathedral, and from 
 their form do not appear to be earlier than the reign of 
 Edward III. That they are not as old as the pattern is placed 
 beyond a doubt by the fact of their execution on yellow stained 
 glass.^ 
 
 It is clear that ornamented borders were used in the chapter- 
 house windows. Three varieties of these borders remain in the 
 west triplet, and are sketched in Plate I. figs. 1, 4, and 5, which 
 may be identified respectively with figures U, V, and W in 
 Carter's plate, and Avhich shows that they belonged to the 
 chapter-house.^ I have appropriated one of these borders to 
 the pattern fig. 1 (though it appears from Carter's plate that the 
 border belonged to a different pattern), as I found that its addi- 
 tion made the pattern 4 feet 1 inch wide — the exact width of 
 the chapter-house lower lights. Another pattern from the 
 chapter-house, one half of which is inserted in each of the two 
 upper south lights of the great south transept, if doubled and 
 enlarged with a border of equal width to the last, would also 
 exactly fit the lower lights of the chapter-house. This pattern 
 resembles one represented in Carter's plate, fig. 5. There is 
 one pattern now in the west light of the lowest triplet of the 
 small south transept of the same character as the other patterns 
 
 1 In the engraving of this pattern in '•'■ A border to one of the windows is 
 
 Shaw's 'Encyclopedia of Ornament,' represented in the slight indication of 
 
 the form of the fleui'-de-lis is humoured the chapter-house glass given in the 
 
 so as to accord with the date of the 14th plate of Britton's 'History of 
 
 I'i^ttcrii. Salisbury Cathedral.' 
 
PLA'I'E iV 
 
 Philip Delamotje, del . from (ira.mngs Ly C WinsLon . 
 
 Vincent Brooks . 
 
 SALISBURY, 
 
TAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 121 
 
 from the chapter-house, which, if placed in one of the lights of 
 that building, would admit only of a narrow strip of glass 
 between it and the stone arch ; but this pattern, if it ever 
 belonged to the chapter-house, was removed thence long before 
 the others, and the difference in the hue of its material favours 
 the supposition that it originally belonged to some other place, 
 most probably to a window of the cathedral. 
 
 Of the geometrical patterns before alluded to, two specimens 
 retain their original position in two of the east clearstory windows 
 of the great north transept. Four other specimens, which were 
 removed from the clearstory, are inserted in the lowest part of 
 the lights of the south triplet of the small south transept, and 
 a few others lie at present in the glazier's room attached to the 
 cathedral. 
 
 These patterns, as before observed, are entirely composed of 
 plain pieces of glass leaded together. The border consists of a 
 plain strip of white glass. In design, some resemble a window 
 of quarries, having banded edges ; but the majority suggest the 
 idea of a number of plain flat members interwoven together. 
 Sketches of two examples are given in Plate IV. ^ Most of 
 these patterns are enriched by the occasional insertion of small 
 plain pieces of coloured glass. The white glass employed in 
 these patterns is, in general, of a deeper hue than that used in 
 the painted patterns, and gives the windows in consequence the 
 appearance of having been made up of refuse fragments. Some 
 of the pieces of glass have almost a purple tint ; the greater 
 part incline from a light to a deep dusky yellow hue. These 
 differences of tint impart great richness and variety to the 
 patterns. I think it may be assumed that the geometrical 
 patterns are coeval, at all events, with the later painted patterns 
 that belong to the cathedral. 
 
 The next glass in order of date consists of a number of rather 
 early Decorated quarries (in Avhich the yellow stain is used) that 
 are now employed as a border to the centre light of the east 
 windows of the north and south aisles of the choir. These 
 quarries were removed from a window of the small south 
 transept, near the entrance to the vestry, where they w^ere 
 placed squarewise. The fleurs-de-lis in the border of the west 
 window of the south aisle of the nave have akeady been 
 noticed. 
 
 ^ The drawinprs are made to a ycale of Ivj. inch to a foot. 
 
122 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 It now becomes necessary, for the purpose of continuing to 
 investigate the remains of painted glass in order of date, to 
 leave the cathedral for St. Thomas's church. The first window 
 of the north aisle, counting from the east, retains in the head 
 of both its outer lower lights, and in all its principal tracery 
 lights, fragments of the scroll-work and coloured ground of a 
 late Decorated Jesse ;^ the figures have all been destroyed. 
 The stem, unlike that of the Jesse in the cathedral, is a flowing 
 tendril of white glass from which proceed yellow-stained and 
 other-coloured leaves and grapes. The stem is smear-shaded, 
 and the ground of the lights is richly diapered. The smaller 
 tracery lights are filled with small ornaments in white and 
 yellow stained glass. The glass appears to be of the latter part 
 of the reign of Edward III. A few small ornaments of the 
 same character and date remain in the smaller tracery lights 
 of several of the windows of the north aisle. The east window 
 of the north aisle has been a figure and canopy Avindow of the 
 same date as the last glass. The head of an original canopy, 
 composed of white and yellow stained glass, remains in the 
 upper part of each of the two outer lower lights. In the tracery 
 lights are some mutilated dem'i-figures, each under a canopy. 
 Smear-shading is used in the figures, the drawing of which 
 betokens the approach of the Perpendicular style. 
 
 The east window of the south aisle has the remains of canopies 
 in its five lower lights, executed in white and yellow stained 
 glass. In the two topmost tracery lights is represented the 
 Coronation of the Virgin, and in each of the other tracery liglits 
 is a shield bearing a merchant's mark. This glass seems to be 
 of the time of Henry VI. The white glass has a cold greenish 
 tint, but not nearly so strong as that of the glass in the windows 
 of the north aisle, which, again, is quite of a different hue from 
 the white glass of the pattern windows of the cathedral and 
 chapter-house. 
 
 In the vestry adjoining the north aisle of this church is a 
 window of three lights, in which are represented, on brackets, 
 not under canopies, one of the Persons of the Holy Trinity, 
 
 1 The window itself is of early Per- windows, the form of ornament is 
 
 pendicular character. It is clear that, purely Early English ; but in some of 
 
 in genei-al, the changes of style in archi- the sculpture of that edifice, particu- 
 
 tecture preceded the corresponding larly of the doorway, the Decorated 
 
 changes of style in painted glass. In foliage occufs. 
 the glass belonging to the chapter-house 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 123 
 
 St. Christopher, and a saint bishop. Tlie lights are glazed 
 with ornamental quarries, which form the background to the 
 figures, and have borders composed of stained yellow ornaments 
 on a red or blue ground. The glass appears to be also of the 
 reign of Henry VI. The head of St. Christopher, and the whole 
 of the Divine Infant, are painted on a piece of very light pot- 
 metal pink glass, an unusual occurrence in English glass of this 
 period. The elaborate finish of these figures, and general light- 
 ness of the colours used in the window, contrast strongly with 
 the more simple and vigorous execution of the figures, and the 
 vivid colouring of the Jesse in the cathedral. Stipple-shading 
 is employed ; but owing to a timid application of it, the figures 
 appear quite flat. 
 
 The Hall of John Halle contains some excellent specimens of 
 ornamental glazing and heraldry of the latter part of the reign 
 of Henry VI., or commencement of the reign of Edward IV. 
 The windows have all been "restored;" but it is easy to dis- 
 tinguish the modern additions, wdiich are not extensive, from the 
 original glazing. The lights have borders composed of small 
 rectangular ornaments (three varieties placed alternately are 
 generally used) of white and yellow stained glass, separated by 
 small bits of plain blue and red, or blue, green, and pink glass. 
 The upper cuspidation of the light is occupied with a lion's head, 
 and the next cuspidation on each side with either a rose, a crown, 
 a star with wavy rays, or a sun, painted on white and yellow 
 stained glass. Ciphers, instead of roses, &c., are used in the 
 six cuspidations of one of the lights on the east side of the hall. 
 The ground of the lights is composed of ornamented quarries, 
 between each row of which is inserted diagonally a scroll in- 
 scribed " drede." ^ A panel containing either a coat-of-arms 
 or a badge is introduced in the upper part of each of the 
 lights on the east side of the hall by being let in to the 
 quarry-ground, the pattern of which is cut by the panel. This 
 mode of introducing the panels affords another and a very 
 common exemplification of the principle of employing different 
 planes of ornament for purposes of enrichment. It may be 
 said, indeed, that in these windows there are five planes 
 of ornament, viz. 1st, the quarry-ground ; 2nd, the scrolls, 
 which are supposed to lie on the quarry-ground ; 3rd, the 
 
 ' An attempt is made in Duke's account of the hall to assign a meaning to 
 this word. 
 
124 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 panels; 4tL, the shields or badges laid on the panels; and 
 5th, tlie border of the window which cuts the design. A repre- 
 sentation of Jolni Halle himself— of which, however, only the 
 legs and ground beneath are original — occupies the centre of 
 one of the lights on the west side of the hall. I must refer the 
 reader to Duke's account of the Hall of John Halle for a descrip- 
 tion of the badges, and for the blazon of the shields. 
 
 The next remains in order of date are the pieces of late Per- 
 pendicular and Cinquecento glass used to fill up the west triplet 
 of the nave and the centre-light of the east windows of the north 
 and south aisles of the choir of the cathedral. Some of this 
 glass was brought from France, some from the neighbourhood 
 of Exeter. One subject, the arms of Henry VII., now in the 
 top of the centre-light of the west triplet, was brought from one 
 of the south windows of the south aisle of the nave. Not having 
 examined these remains so minutely as the other glass, I am 
 unable to give an equally detailed account of them. The 
 subjects in the west triplet of the nave are, in the south light, 
 a figure of St. Peter ; a figure praying ; a figure kneeling before 
 a crucifix (St. Francis ?) ; a group of figures ; and a female saint ; 
 all which are in the style of the early part of the 16th century. 
 The subjects in the centre-light are, a Crucifixion, with Mary 
 and John ; the Virgin crowned ; a St. Peter ; a bishop en- 
 throned; all which are of the 16th century, and, as it is said, 
 were brought from Normandy. Also the Invention of the Cross 
 (the three crosses are each represented as a cross-tau) ; a Cruci- 
 fixion, with Mary and John ; aU which are of the 16th century, 
 and are said to have been brought from the neighbourhood of 
 Exeter ; and some angels bearing the Instruments of the Passion, 
 also of the 16th century, and said to have been brought from 
 Normandy. 
 
 In the north light the subjects are, a bishop, St. Anthony, 
 the Betrayal of Christ, and a St. Catherine ; all which are of 
 the 16th century, and are said to be French glass. Unfortu- 
 nately I took no memorandum of the subjects in the east 
 windows of the choir aisles ; they are of the same character as 
 the rest. 
 
 Although these glass-paintings are not very favourable spe- 
 cimens of the state of the art in tlie 16th century, a careful 
 examination of them will not be without advantage. They are 
 executed on a material more flimsy than that used in the glass- 
 paintings in the vestry-room of St. Thomas's church, or in the 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 1*25 
 
 Hall of John Halle ; yet they are far more effective ; and the 
 groups 01 figures, tliough more complicated, are as distinct, when 
 seen at a proper distance, as the simpler groups of the 13th 
 century, and convey to tlie spectator as lively an idea of the 
 subject represented. They thus afford a striking proof of the 
 skill of the glass-painters of the 16th century, who, principally 
 by means of admirable arrangements of colour, and the use of 
 powerful though transparent shadows and brilliant lights, dis- 
 played the hitherto undeveloped resources of their art. 
 
 The latest old specimen of glass-painting in the cathedral is 
 the arms of Bishop Jewell, which is dated 1562, and occupies 
 the quatrefoil of the west window of the south aisle of tlie nave. 
 The shield is placed witliin a wreath : and the wdiole composi- 
 tion is a remarkably favourable specimen of the period. 
 
 It now^ only remains for me to notice the modern glass in the 
 cathedral ; which is comprised in the windows of the Lady 
 Chapel, the eastern triplet of the choir, and the south windows 
 of the great south transept, with the exception of the two upper 
 lights. 
 
 The eastern triplet of the Lady Chapel is filled with a repre- 
 sentation of the Eesurrection, designed by Sir Joshua Eeynolds,^ 
 and executed by Francis Egington of Birmingham. I do not 
 question the intrinsic merit of this composition, but it is unfor- 
 tunately not of a nature suited to a glass-pahiting. The prin- 
 cipal object, and indeed the only figure represented, is our Lord 
 ascending from the tomb. In the distance are dimly seen the 
 three crosses on Mount Calvary. Light emanating from our 
 Saviour's person illuminates the objects in His immediate pre- 
 sence ; all around is gloom. This effect is produced by means 
 which cannot be satisfactorily resorted to in a glass-painting, — 
 the keeping of a very large portion of the picture in compara- 
 tive obscurity. For a gloomy or obscure effect in painted glass, 
 however it may be aided by the employment of pot-metals, &g., 
 of deep tint, can only be produced by an exclusion of the light, 
 with nearly opaque enamels. And this, when carried beyond 
 a certain liiuit, occasions a flat, heavy, and, paradoxical as it 
 may appear, flimsy appearance, destructive of all impressiveness, 
 
 ^ It is stated in Gilpin's 'Western the ground that he had thereby en- 
 Counties,' that in his first design for hanced the character of the miracle, 
 the window Sir Joshua represented the It is more probable that Sir Joshua 
 moutli of the tomb closed ; and when defended himself on the authority of 
 remonstrated with, defended himself on ancient precedents. 
 
126 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 and widely different from the depth and transparency of a 
 picture in oils painted in equally deep tones. The task was 
 thus imposed on the glass-painter — even had he possessed suf- 
 ficient genius, instead of literally copying his model, to have 
 embodied its spirit — of representing what is particularly difficult, 
 if not incapable, of adequate representation in painted glass. A 
 skilful glass-colourist might, to a certain extent, have succeeded 
 in imparting to the window an effect more in accordance with 
 Sir Joshua Reynolds's intention ; but the cours" adopted by 
 Egington, of executing the window entirely on white glass, with 
 enamel colours and stains, was of all others that most calculated 
 to ensure 'an unsatisfactory result. In comparison with what 
 might have been effected, the colouring of the window is weak, 
 and its brightest lights are dull ; and the red-brown enamel in 
 the landscape and sky, unaided by pot-metal glass, wholly fails 
 of producing that supernatural lurid appearance which seems 
 to have been intended by Sir Joshua Reynolds. 
 
 The remaining windows of the Lady Chapel are also painted 
 by Egington. They are filled with a quarry pattern, having a 
 dull red rose stained in the midst of each quarry, and thickly 
 covered with a reddish -brown ground. The effect of these 
 windows, like that of the east window, is dull and heavy, with- 
 out being deep or impressive. 
 
 The subject in the east window of the choir is the Lifting up 
 of the Brazen Serpent in the Wilderness. It was executed by 
 Pearson, after a design by Mortimer, and as a glass-painting is 
 certainly superior to the east window of the Lady Chapel. The 
 design is, in principle, not unsuitable to a glass-painting ; there 
 are no overpowering masses of heavy shadow, and the more 
 positive colours are carried to the extreme verge of the picture. 
 The colouring is lively, and the picture has a certain degree of 
 brilliancy. Pot-metal glass, as well as enamel colours and stains, 
 is employed. Still I cannot admit the fitness of the painting 
 for its situation. The character of the architecture is severe, 
 solemn, and gloomy ; and would therefore appear to demand in 
 the glass-painting simplicity of composition and colouring, as 
 well as depth of tone : in short, a character the very opposite 
 to that of the present window. A genuine Early English 
 Pattern window, though possessing but little positive colour, 
 would, owing to its depth of effect, and the gravity and solemnity 
 of its appearance, have suited the place better. The "Five 
 Sisters" harmonize admirably with the architecture of the north 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 127 
 
 transept of York. Another ground of objection appears to be, 
 that the design is carried across the triplet independent of the 
 divisions of the lights. It has been shown in a former part of 
 this paper, that the practice of extending the design of a glass- 
 painting beyond the limits of a single light is not only fully 
 supported by the best authorities, but is strictly in accordance 
 with the principles of mediaeval composition. And indeed, when 
 the lights are divided merely by mullions, the practice might 
 safely be allowed to rest on its own merits : for, without having 
 recourse to it, it would often be impossible to break, by the 
 occasional introduction of a group, the painful monotony which 
 would otherwise be occasioned by the continual repetition of 
 single figures throughout a series of windows, or even in one 
 large window, and at the same time ensure to the group suf- 
 ficient size to produce a satisfactory effect. But in the present 
 instance the lights are separated not by mullions, but by portions 
 of wall, of such breadth as materially to weaken, if not destroy, 
 the idea of the continuity of tlie subject ; and thus an unpleasing 
 effect is produced. 
 
 It may be conceded, that in this particular window the use 
 of a landscape background is unfortunate, because it is opposed 
 to that simplicity of colouring which is most in harmony with 
 the character of the architecture. But apart from this consi- 
 deration, the objection so continually urged in certain quarters 
 against the employment in a painted window of such a land- 
 scape background as is compatible with the conditions of glass- 
 painting, is untenable. It is true that the lead-lines, and want 
 of atmosphere inseparable from painted glass, would be fatal to 
 the effect of a glass-painting in which a landscape formed the 
 most prominent object ; but the landscape suitable to a glass- 
 painting is a mere accessory, one of whose functions is as it were 
 to tie together the composition, and which is very subordinate in 
 interest to that of other parts of the composition. And such a 
 landscape may be represented very adequately in painted glass, ^ 
 quite as naturally indeed as any other object can be represented 
 in a window. No objection founded on the want of means of 
 representation can be urged against the use of a landscape in 
 painted glass, which would not apply with equal force against 
 its employment in a fresco, or other large picture. It is possible, 
 
 ' This is denied in a recent article in the ' Eoclesiologist,' No. 74, p. 81 ; bvit the 
 confusion of the winter's ideas is such as to render further comment superfluous. 
 
128 PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 no doubt, to represent almost any subject without such an ad- 
 junct ; but none can deny the power of a landscape, when 
 properly introduced, in assisting the picture, by an additional 
 appeal to nature, to the performance of its true office, — that 
 of awakening in the mind a lively idea of the subject repre- 
 sented. It therefore seems foolish, without some good reason, 
 to debar the artist from availing himself of it. The landscape 
 in Raphael's Miraculous Draught of Fishes has often been 
 deservedly commended ; if omitted, would the picture have 
 proved so striking and effective ? 
 
 It has sometimes been contended that the use of a landscape 
 in any mural painting, and by consequence in a glass-painting, 
 is improper ; because, when we see a landscape painted on a 
 wall, we know that we do not look upon an opening ; that, when 
 we see a landscape high up in a church window, we know that 
 it is impossible that a landscape could be visible through a 
 window in such a situation. The objection, however, is rather 
 ingenious than solid. It rests on a misapprehension of the true 
 and proper end of painting. This is not delusion ; it is not to 
 make the spectator suppose that the object represented is really 
 present in the place where it is represented ; it is only to awaken 
 in the mind a lively idea of this object. "Imitations," says 
 Dr. Johnson, " produce pain or pleasure, not because they are 
 mistaken for realities, but because they bring realities to mind. 
 When the imagination is recreated by a painted landscape, the 
 trees are not supposed capable to give us shade, or the fountains 
 coolness ; but we consider how we should be pleased with such 
 fountains playing beside us, and such woods waving over us." 
 It is admitted that no one mistakes any such representation 
 for a reality; it is therefore hard to perceive what possible 
 impropriety there can be in our being suffered to see the repre- 
 sentation in a spot wdiere the reality cannot be, or why a rule 
 should be applied to landscapes which does not hold good as to 
 other subjects of painting. A third objection, and, as it seems 
 to me, the only ground admitting of argument, is the difficulty 
 of seeing such pictures from the true perspective point of sight ; 
 but the fact that numbers of pictures are viewed from what is 
 not the true point of sight, and are yet seen with undiminished 
 pleasure, seems to afford a complete answer to it. 
 
 The only other painted windows of the cathedral are those in 
 the great south transept. The two topmost lights of the south 
 end are, as before-mentioned, filled with early glass. The rest 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT SALISBURY. 
 
 129 
 
 contain modern copies of the Early Englisli patterns, except the 
 centre-light of the lowest triplet, which appears to be modern in 
 design. These windows afford one of the many proofs that, how- 
 ever closely the design of ancient glass is copied, the imitation 
 cannot be complete unless the texture of the ancient material is 
 copied also. 
 
ON THE PAINTED GLASS IN NEW COLLEGE 
 CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFOKD. 
 
 ^^^H 
 
 ll^^~^I!^Is-^^'^^^~"^~^-2.---~^ 
 
 W'XUUi^TwII 
 
 i 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 1 
 
 (From the Archseological Journal, volume ix.) 
 
 T has often been to me a matter of surprise that 
 there should still be wanting, not only a detailed 
 account, but even an accurate catalogue, of the 
 numerous and interesting specimens of ancient 
 painted glass existing in the public and colle- 
 giate buildings of Oxford, considering the number 
 of persons addicted to Archaeological pursuits 
 who enjoy in an Oxford residence, and leisure 
 time, peculiar facilities for such an undertaking. 
 
 The present paper hardly pretends to supply the latter desi- 
 deratum, even in respect of the single example which forms its 
 subject. I have had neither time nor opportunity to test the 
 accuracy of my researches as rigidly as I could have wished ; nor 
 have I sought for any other documentary evidence than what 
 has already appeared in print; therefore, what I have written 
 must be regarded as a contribution only towards a more full and 
 perfect description of the painted glass in New College Chapel 
 and Hall. The labour expended upon it will, I dare say, be appre- 
 ciated by those who have actually prosecuted similar inquiries. 
 
 It will render the following remarks on the glass in New 
 College Chapel more intelligible if I state, at the outset, that 
 this building consists of an Antechapel, or Transept, and of a 
 Choir, or Inner Chapel, at right angles to it ; — that the ante- 
 chapel is furnished with a central west window, having fourteen 
 lower lights — the widest in the chapel — arranged in two tiers, 
 and a head of tracery, to which no further allusion need be made ; 
 two smaller west windows, one on either side the last, each 
 having eight lower lights arranged in two tiers, and eighteen 
 tracery lights, six only of which are capable of containing 
 figures ; two windows on the north, and one on the soutli side, 
 precisely similar to the last in size and arrangement ; and two 
 
PAINTED GLASS IN NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD. 131 
 
 east windows, facing the smaller west windows, having twelve 
 lower lights apiece — the narrowest in the chapel — and fourteen 
 tracery lights, ten only of which are capable of contahiing 
 figures ; — and that the choir is furnished with five south and five 
 north windows, of the same dimensions and arrangement as the 
 smaller west windows of the antechapel. 
 
 I have been thus minute in noticing the relative widths of the 
 lower lights of these windows, because the soundness of the con- 
 clusions at which I have arrived respecting the original arrange- 
 ment of the glass in the chapel, in great measure depends on 
 the fact of the lights of the two east windows being the nar- 
 rowest, though of equal length with the others. 
 
 The remains of the oldest or original glazing are dispersed 
 throughout all these windows, with the exception of tlie central 
 west window ; and from such an examination of them as time 
 and circumstances have permitted, it appears to me that, when 
 in a perfect state, the lower lights of the northernmost of the 
 west windows, and of the two north windows of the antechapel, 
 contained representations of the Patriarchs and other worthies 
 of the Old Testament — a single figure under a canopy occupying 
 each light; that in like manner the lower lights of the two 
 east windows of the antechapel contained representations of the 
 twelve Apostles, and of our Lord's Crucifixion, four times re- 
 peated ; that similar representations of Old and New Testament 
 and Church saints and worthies occupied the lower lights of the 
 south and smaller west windows of the antechapel, and most 
 probably the lower lights of all the choir windows ; and that the 
 various orders of angels ^ were represented in the principal 
 tracery lights of the antechapel and choir windows, besides the 
 Coronation of the Virgin, and Wykeham's Adoration of Christ, 
 which are to be seen in the tracery of the east windows of the 
 antechapel. I have no other clue to the subjects formerly 
 represented in the central west window than what is derivable 
 from the fragments removed from this Avindow to make way for 
 Sir Joshua Reynolds's design, and which are still, I believe, pre- 
 served in boxes at Winchester College. From the names which 
 I found on searching these fragments during the Institute's visit 
 to Winchester in 1845, I conclude that single canopied figures 
 of Church saints occupied the lower lights of this window ; but 
 I should state that I also met with part of a small mitre, appa- 
 rently belonging to the subject of Becket's Martyrdom, which, 
 
 ' One complete set of angels is engraved in ' The Calendar of the Anglican 
 Church illustrated,' Parker, Oxford, p. 116. 
 
 2 K 
 
J 82 
 
 THE PxVINTED GLASS IN 
 
 liowever, judging from the small size of the mitre, might have 
 been inserted in the tracery lights of this window.^ 
 
 I am sensible that the opinion I have formed respecting the 
 original arrangement of the glass rests partly on hypothesis, 
 partly on evidence, in no case conclusive, and in many cases 
 weak and uncertain. With this apology I must leave the matter 
 in the reader's hands, and hope that he will be amused with the 
 description I sliall give of the glass, however much he may 
 otherwise differ from my views. 
 
 It will be convenient to commence with an examination of the 
 glass in the northernmost of the west windows of the ante- 
 chapel, in which window, as it would seem, the series of subjects 
 originally began ; and, in order to compensate as much as pos- 
 sible for the want of illustrative aid, I give the accompanying 
 diagram of this window, in which the lower lights are distin- 
 guished by numbers, and the principal tracery lights by letters. 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 D 
 
 
 R 
 
 F 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 I shall employ the same diagram in explanation of all the other 
 windows, except the central west and the two east windows of 
 the antechapel. 
 
 THE NORTHERNMOST WEST WINDOW OF THE ANTECHAPEL. 
 
 Each of the eight lower lights of this window is occupied, as 
 already mentioned, with a canopy containing a single figure; 
 and I will state, since an attention to such minutise will tend 
 materially to facilitate our investigation of the other windows. 
 
 ^ The glass in Winchester College 
 chapel unfortunately throws no light on 
 the subject. That chapel has no west 
 window. Its side windows are fitted 
 with canopied figures of saints and 
 angels; and its east window with a 
 design composed of the following sub- 
 jects : The Stem of Jesse, the Cruci- 
 
 fixion, and the Last Judgment, When 
 represented by itself, the Last Judg- 
 ment is, I believe, most commonly 
 assigned to a west window, but, when 
 associated with the Crucifixion, it is 
 very frequently met with in an east 
 window. The Crucifixion is usually 
 represented in an east window. 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFOED. 133 
 
 that each of the canopies in Nos. 1 and 3 has a flat hood, its 
 spire background coloured blue, and the tapestry back of its 
 niche, which extends upwards to the groining of the niche, red ; 
 and that the canopies in Nos. 2 and 4 have projecting hoods, red 
 spire-grounds, and blue tapestries ; whilst, in the lower tier of 
 lights, Nos. 5 and 7 have projecting hoods, blue spire-grounds, 
 and red tapestries ; and Nos. 6 and 8 flat hoods, red spire-grounds, 
 and blue tapestries. By these means, as will be perceived, a 
 perfect alternation of form and colour is maintained throughout 
 the canopies. All the canopies have projecting pedestals ; but 
 those only of the lower tier of lights are crossed by the founder's 
 legend, "Orate pro Willelmo de Wykeham episcopo Wynton 
 fundatore istius collegii," which is written upon a continuous 
 scroll, divided only by the mullions of the window. 
 
 Light No. 1. Jonas p'pheta is written across the pedestal of 
 the canopy. The figure, which, like the other Old Testament 
 worthies, has no nimbus, holds a scroll inscribed, Hehreus ego su' 
 ^ dominu' d'm cell ego timeo. (See Jonah i. 9.) The tapestry is 
 powdered with letters I, crowned.^ 
 
 No. 2. Joel p'pheta is written on the pedestal of the canopy. 
 The scroll held by the figure is inscribed, hi voile josaphath 
 iudicavit oes getes. (See Joel iii. 12, of which this seems a para- 
 phrase.) The tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. 
 
 No. 3. Amos \ppli\eta ^ is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
 is inscribed, qui \ced\ificat in celu' assencone sua. (See Amos ix. 
 6.) The tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned. 
 
 No. 4. Micheas p'pheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
 is inscribed. Be \^Si'\ on exhibit [egredietur lux ^ v]erhm' de vert. 
 (See Micah iv. 2.) The tapestry is powdered with letters M, 
 crowned. 
 
 No. 5. Ada' pm' pa\ter] is written on the pedestal. The 
 figure holds a spade, and looks sorrowful. The tapestry is 
 powdered with letters A, crowned. Part of the founder's legend 
 is written across the pedestal of this and the next three cano- 
 pies. 
 
 No. 6. Eva mr oiu viveciu' is written on the pedestal. The 
 figure holds a distaff. The tapestry is powdered with letters E, 
 crowned. 
 
 ' The crowned letters bring to mind On whiche was first yritten a crouned A, 
 
 Chaucer's Prologue to the Canterbury And alter, Amor vindt cmmia." 
 
 Tales : ^ The missing parts of the inscrip- 
 
 " Of small corall aboute hire arm she bare *i"^^' ^''^^'} ^^'^ '^ practicable, are sup- 
 
 A pair of bedes gauded all with grene, plied within brackets. 
 And thereon beng a broche of gold ful shene, 
 
134 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 No 7. Seth filius Ade' is written on the pedestal. The figure 
 holds a book. The tapestry is powdered with letters S, crowned. 
 
 No. 8. JEnocJi tra'slat' is written on the pedestal. The figure 
 holds a small scroll, inscribed, ivit cu deo. The tapestry is pow- 
 dered with letters E, crowned. 
 
 The tracery lights of this window, A to F inclusive, are each 
 filled with a canopy under which stands an angel. Troni is 
 written upon a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the 
 lights A and B. The angels throughout these tracery lights are 
 alike in design. The canopies have alternately blue spire-grounds 
 and red tapestries, or vice versa. The smaller tracery lights are 
 filled with ornaments, such as leaves, monsters, &c., painted upon 
 white and yellow stained glass. 
 
 FIRST NORTH WINDOW OF THE ANTECHAPEL FROM THE WEST. 
 
 Light No. 1. Osee ppheta is written on the pedestal. The 
 figure holds a scroll inscribed, mors ero [riio\r8 tua morsus tuus 
 ero inferne. (See Hosea xiii. 14.) The tapestry is powdered 
 with letters H, crowned. From which I infer either that the 
 tapestry does not belong to this figure, or that in the course of 
 repairs wrong letters have been inserted. However, it may have 
 been a mere caprice to aspirate the name. 
 
 No. 2. Ahacuch ppheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
 is inscribed, D'ne audivi \_auditi\oe tud ^ timui. (See Habakkuk 
 iii. 2.) The tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned. 
 
 No. 3. Ysaias ppJieta is written on the pedestal. The scroll is 
 inscribed, Ecce virgo concipiet ^ pariet filium. (See Isaiah vii. 14.) 
 The tapestry is powdered with letters Y, crowned. 
 
 No. 4. \_Byiruc ppheta is written on the pedestal. The scroll 
 is inscribed. Post hec in tris visus est ^ cu' honC cdvsatus est. 
 (See Baruch iii. 37.) The tapestry is, however, powdered with 
 letters M, crowned. Most of the remarks made on No. 1 equally 
 apply here. 
 
 No. 5. Mathusale fill's Enoch is written on the pedestal. The 
 figure holds a small scroll, which appears to be inscribed with 
 the following words : Legem n mor\ The tapestry is powdered 
 with letters M, crowned. The following portion of the founder's 
 legend is written across the pedestal : Orate p Willmo. 
 
 No. 6. JSfoe : ^ : archa : fah'la is written on the pedestal. The 
 figure holds an oar. The tapestry is powdered with letters N, 
 crowned. The portion of the founder's legend that crosses the 
 pedestal is de W 
 
 No. 7. Abraha priarcha is written on the pedestal. The 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 135 
 
 tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned. The portion of 
 the founder's legend which crosses the pedestal is .... ^on 
 fudator. 
 
 No. 8. Isaac patriarcha is written on the pedestal. The 
 tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. The portion of 
 the founder's legend attached to this pedestal is istius 
 
 Each of the tracery lights, A to F inclusive, is filled with a 
 canopy, under which is a military figure, winged as an angel, 
 clad in a basinet and camail, jupon, broad sword-belt, petticoat 
 of mail below the jupon, and plate or cuirbouilli arm and leg 
 armour. The figure holds a spear, to which a pennon charged 
 with a plain cross is attached. Prin : ci : pa : tus is written on 
 a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the lights A and B. 
 The smaller tracery lights are filled with ornaments as in the 
 last window. 
 
 SECOND NOETH WINDOW OF THE ANTECHAPEL FKOM THE WEST. 
 
 No. 1 light. Sophonias p'pha is written on the pedestal of 
 the canopy. The scroll held by the figure is inscribed, Hec est 
 eivitas gVriosa quia dicit ego sum. (See Zephaniah ii. 15.) The 
 tapestry is powdered with letters S, crowned. 
 
 No. 2. Daniel p'plieta is written on the pedestal. The figure 
 points downwards with its right hand, as if in allusion to the den 
 of lions. On the scroll is written, Post ehdomadas septuagenta 
 (sic) duas occit\ (See Daniel ix. 26.) The tapestry is powdered 
 with letters D, crowned. 
 
 No. 3. Jeremias p'pha is written on the pedestal. The scroll is 
 incribed Patre' vocabis me dicit d'ns. (See Jeremiah iii. 19). The 
 tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. Across the pedestal 
 is written the following portion of the founder's legend, orate 
 
 p ; which is either an insertion, or else shows that this 
 
 figure was taken from some other window having prophets in its 
 lower tier of lights. 
 
 No. 4. Ahdias ppha is written on the pedestal. The scroll is 
 inscribed, et rectum erit d'nm d'ni amen. The tapestry is pow- 
 dered with letters A, crowned. 
 
 No. 5. Jacobus par is written on the pedestal. The 
 
 tapestry is powdered with letters I, crowned. The following 
 portion of the founder's legend is written across the pedestal, 
 orate p Willmo. 
 
 No. 6. Judas ma . , , . (Machabeus ?) is written on the 
 pedestal. The figure has a coronet and sceptre. The tapestry 
 is powdered with letters I, crowned. The following portion of 
 
136 
 
 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 the founder's legend is written across the pedestal : de WykeJim 
 ep'o. 
 
 No. 7. Moyses dux P'U dei is written on the pedestal. The 
 figure holds in his left hand a green diptych, inscribed with 
 Lombardic capitals. The tapestry is powdered with letters M, 
 crowned. The pedestal is crossed with the following portion of 
 the founder's legend : Wynton fu'dator. 
 
 No. 8. Aaro' is written on the pedestal. The lower part of 
 the tapestry is powdered with letters A, crowned, and the fol- 
 lowing portion of the founder's legend crosses the pedestal : istius 
 collegii ; — but the feet only of the figure belong to the high priest; 
 the rest belongs to a prophet, part of another window, who 
 appears to be Nahum, from the corresponding part of the tapestry 
 being powdered with letters N, crowned, and from the following 
 inscription on the scroll held by the figure : ecce sup' montes 
 ew'ageliz'atis anricatis. (See Nahum i. 15.) 
 
 Each of the tracery lights, A to F inclusive, is filled with a 
 canopy, under which is a winged figure habited in the civil dress 
 of a king, i. e. crowned, holding a sword and sceptre, and clad in 
 a tunic with short skirts, a furred tippet, hose, and shoes. Dna : 
 do : nes is written on a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in 
 the lights A and B. The smaller tracery lights are filled with 
 ornaments as in former windows. 
 
 THE TWO EAST WINDOWS OF THE ANTECHAPEL. 
 
 The arrangement of the subjects of these windows in their 
 original order is a somewhat troublesome task, requiring a close 
 attention to detail, and continual references to individual lights. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 D 
 
 E 
 
 F 
 
 
 G 
 
 H 
 
 I 
 
 K 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 S 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 L 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 Q 
 
 
 R 
 
 S 
 
 T 
 
 u 
 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 '' 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 NORTHERN-EAST WINDOW. SOUTHERN-EAST WINDOW. 
 
 It will be convenient to distinguish the windows by calling one 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 137 
 
 the Xorthern-East window, and the other the Southern-East 
 window ; and, with a view to render the follo"sying investigation 
 more intelL'gible, I give diagrams of both windows, in which 
 the lower hghts are numbered, and the principal tracery lights 
 lettered, in a consecutive series, commencing in the northern- 
 east window. 
 
 Xo. 1 light. The glass in this light consists of portions of 
 several designs. The upper part of the light is occupied with the 
 head of a canopy, the spire background of which is red. From 
 its fitting the light, and there being only three others like it in 
 the building, I conclude that it belongs to one of the canopies con- 
 taining a crucifix hereafter mentioned. Below is part of another 
 canopy cut to fit the light, under which is placed the upper part 
 of a female figure on a red tapestr}^ background, powdered with 
 letters C, crowned. This figure does not belong to either window. 
 Below it is the central part of another figure, on a blue tapestry 
 background, powdered with letters E, crowned ; which likewise 
 does not belong to either window. The remainder of the light 
 is filled with the lower part of a canopy, which, as 1 shall have 
 occasion to refer to it again, I shall describe minutely. The 
 pedestal of this canopy differs in design from that of any of the 
 canopies in either window, except the three which I shall pre- 
 sently mention. In particular, it is much more lofty, is hollow, 
 and within it is the sitting figure of an aged man, supported on 
 the top of a tall slender pedestal or shaft. A scroll passes through 
 the pedestal of the canopy a little below the figure just men- 
 tioned, and at the same height from the sill of the light as that 
 at which the pedestals of the canopies in Xos. 4, 19, 20, 21, 22, 
 23, and 24, hereafter described, are crossed by the founder's 
 legend. The portion of the scroll in the present case is inscribed, 
 
 episc . The lower part of the canopy niche remains ; on its 
 
 floor are three steps coloured green, surmounted by what is 
 evidently the shaft of a cross coloured purple, on each side of 
 which is a small portion of a white cloud ; the rest of the subject 
 is wanting. The inside of the niche has a blue tapestry ground, 
 powdered with little yellow saltiers, or letters X. 
 
 No. 2. In the head of this light, and exactly fitting it, is the 
 head of a canopy on a blue spire-ground, exactly like that first 
 mentioned in No. 1. The rest of the glass, consisting of part 
 of a canopy which has been cut to fit the light, half a female 
 figure on a blue tapestry ground powdered with letters C, crowned, 
 part of the hood of a canopy, and part of the base of another, 
 inscribed 3Iari Salome, does not belong to either window. 
 
138 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 No. 3. In the head of the light, and exactly fitting it, is the 
 head of a canopy on a red spire-ground exactly like that first 
 mentioned in No. 1, Below is part of a canopy whicli has been 
 cut to fit the light. Under it is the upper half of a female 
 figure (which does not appear to belong to the canopy), on a blue 
 tapestry ground, powdered with letters E, crowned. Below are 
 fragments of canopy-work made into a sort of pattern ; and the 
 residue of the light is occupied with the pedestal, and part of 
 the niche of a canopy, which clearly was originally of the same 
 design as that described in No. 1. The only difference is, that 
 here the steps of the cross are coloured purple, the shafts green, 
 and the tapestry ground red. The scroll running through the 
 pedestal is made up of fragments of other scrolls. 
 
 No. 4. The whole of this light is occupied with a representa- 
 tion of a figure and canopy. The canopy, across whose pedestal 
 is written the following portion of the founder's legend, Istius 
 eollegii, is, in other respects, exactly like that in No. 19 light. 
 The figure is a duplicate of that in No. 24 light. Any further 
 description of either is, therefore, postponed for the present. 
 
 No. 5. In the head of the light, and exactly fitting it, is the 
 head of a canopy on a blue spire-ground exactly like that first 
 mentioned in No. 1. Below is part of a canopy cut to fit the 
 light, and the upper half of a female figure holding a palm- 
 branch, on a red tapestry ground, powdered with letters M, 
 crowned. A piece of yellow glass has been accidentally inserted 
 in the nimbus of this figure, in such a manner as, at first sight, 
 to impart to it a cruciferous appearance. The figure does not 
 belong to either window. The remainder of the light is filled 
 with a pedestal and part of a niche of a canopy, precisely similar 
 to that described in No. 1. The steps of the cross are here 
 green, the shaft is purple, the tapestry red, and on the scroll 
 running through the pedestal is written Wynton. 
 
 No. 6. In the upper part of the light is the top of a canopy, 
 of the same design as that in No. 4 light, having a red spire- 
 ground. Below is part of the hood of a canopy, cut to fit the 
 light, under which are fragments of a male saint (which do not 
 belong to either window), on a blue tapestry ground, powdered 
 with letters B, crowned. The remainder of the light is filled 
 with the pedestal and part of the niche of a canopy similar to 
 that described in No. 1. The steps of the cross are green, the 
 shaft is pink, the clouds, as in all the other examples, are white ; 
 and seven of the toes of the Saviour are still attached to the 
 shaft, leaving the nature of the design no longer in doubt. The 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 139 
 
 tapestry ground of the niche is bkie,. po^yde^ed with yellow letters 
 X ; and the scroll which passes through the pedestal is hiscribed 
 fundatore. 
 
 Xo. 7. This is a figure and canopy light. The canopy hood is 
 supported by a semicircuhir niche arch ; its spire background is 
 blue, and the niche tapestry is red. Precisely similar canopies 
 are inserted in Xos. 9 and 11, and in Xos. 13, 15, and 17 also. 
 The pedestal is inscribed Scs Petru. The figure, which exhibits 
 the tonsure, carries a book in one hand and keys in the other ; 
 it is clad in blue and white robes, the white being powdered witli 
 letters P, crowned, drawn in outline, and stained yellow. 
 
 Xo. 8. This is also a figure and canopy light. The canopy 
 hood is double-headed ; its spire-ground is coloured pink or warm 
 purple, and the niche tapestiy is blue, powdered with small 
 yellow stars or suns rayonnes. Precisely similar canopies are 
 inserted in Xos. 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18. The pedestal is inscribed 
 Scs Andrea\ The fi.gure carries a small saltier. 
 
 Xo. 9. The pedestal is inscribed Scs Jacoh\ The figure holds 
 a pilgrim's staff. 
 
 Xo. 10. The pedestal is inscribed Scs Jlohaii^es. The figure 
 carries a cup, from which a dragon issues, and is clad in red and 
 white robes, the white being powdered with small dragons 
 issuing from cups, drawn in outline, and stained yellow. 
 
 Xo. 11 is inscribed Scs Thoma. The fi.gm-e holds a spear in 
 the left hand ; the forefinger of the right is uplifted, — a move- 
 ment which, coupled with the general attitude of the figure, 
 seems to allude to the means whereby the Saint's incredulity was 
 overcome. 
 
 Xo. 12 is inscribed Scs JacoV . The figure, which carries a 
 scimitar, is clad in red and white garments, the white being 
 powdered with small monsters, drawn in outline and stained 
 yellow. 
 
 Xo. 13 is inscribed Scs Philippu, 
 
 Xo. 1-1 is inscribed Scs Bartolem. The figure carries a knife. 
 
 Xo. 15 is inscribed Scs 3Iathe\ 
 
 Xo. 16 is inscribed Scs Simon. The figure bears an axe. 
 
 Xo. 17 is inscribed Sc's Mathia. The fio-ure carries a club. 
 
 Xo. 18 is inscribed Scs Judas. 
 
 Xo. 19. The canopy in this light differs in design from any of 
 those already described, though its hood is as long as those in 
 Xo. 7 and the following lights. The pedestal is crossed with the 
 founder's legend, at the same level as the pedestal in Xo. 1, &c. 
 The spire background is red, and the tapestry blue. The figure 
 
140 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 under the canopy is, from the sorrowful expression of the coun- 
 tenance, evidently a representation of the Mater Dolorosa : the 
 left hand is pressed against the head ; in the other is a book. 
 The figure looks towards its left. There is no other inscription 
 except the following portion of the founder's legend, Orate p 
 Willo, which, as before mentioned, crosses the pedestal of the 
 canopy. 
 
 No. 20. The canopy is of the same design as the last, but its 
 spire background is coloured blue, and its tapestry is red, 
 powdered with letters M, crowned. The figure is evidently a 
 representation of the Mater Dolorosa. The hands are clasped 
 together; the figure looks to its left. The pedestal is crossed 
 with the following portion of the founder's legend : Fundatore. 
 
 No. 21. The canopy is of the same design as No. 19, and has 
 a red spire-ground. The tapestry is blue, but is powdered with 
 yellow crosses. The figure, whicli looks to its right, is evidently 
 a representation of St. John the Evangelist. The right hand is 
 pressed against the head, but the countenance is not particularly 
 sorrow^ful. The pedestal is crossed with the following portion of 
 the founder's legend : Episcopo. 
 
 No. 22. The canopy is of the same design as No. 19. The 
 spire background is blue, and the tapestry is red, powdered with 
 letters M, crowned. The figure is an exact duplicate of that in 
 No. 20. The portion of the founder's legend is, Wynton. 
 
 No. 23. The canopy is of the same design as the last, but the 
 spire-ground is red and the tapestry blue, powdered with yellow 
 crosses. The figure is a perfect duplicate of that in No. 21. 
 The portion of the founder's legend is, de Wyheham, 
 
 No. 24. The cano23y is of the same design as No. 19, but the 
 spire-ground is blue, and the tapestry is red, powdered with 
 letters |, crowned. The figure, whicli, as before mentioned, is 
 an exact duplicate of that in No. 4, is evidently a representation 
 of St. John the Evangelist. The countenance is sorrowful ; the 
 right hand is pressed against the head, in the other is a book. 
 The pedestal is crossed with the following portion of the founder's 
 legend - istius collegii. 
 
 TRACERY LIGHTS. 
 
 A is occupied with the representation, under a small canopy, 
 of a Bishop on his knees, in apparent adoration of the figure in 
 B, which, though mutilated, may be easily recognised as that 
 of our Saviour, seated, and exhibiting the wound in his side to 
 the kneeling Bishop, which, I apprehend, personifies William of 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 141 
 
 Wykeham. This figure is likewise under a canopy. An angel 
 under a canopy is inserted in each of the lights C to K inclusive. 
 The smaller tracery lights are filled with monsters or other 
 ornaments. 
 
 The Coronation of the Virgin is represented in L and M, but 
 the subjects have been transposed, the figure of Christ now 
 occupying L, and that of the Virgin j\I. Each figure is under a 
 canopy. An angel, in female attire, under a canopy, occupies 
 each of the lights X to V, inclusive. The smaller tracery lights 
 are filled with monsters or other ornaments. 
 
 Having described the subjects in these windows, I proceed in 
 the next place to state my reasons for supposing that they were 
 originally arranged as I have mentioned. 
 
 One remarkable feature is, that the pedestal of no canopy in 
 the lights Xos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, U, 15, 16, 17, and 18 is 
 crossed by any continuous scroll, and that the pedestals of the 
 canopies in Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 are so 
 crossed ; the scroll being, as before mentioned, inscribed with the 
 founder's legend. This circumstance, when considered with 
 reference to the design and arrangement of the glass in the other 
 windows of the building — the contents of one of the west and of 
 the two north windows of the antechapel have already been 
 described — raises a strong inference that the glass in the first- 
 mentioned series of lights originally occupied an upper tier of 
 lights, and that the glass in the series of lights secondly men- 
 tioned originally occupied a lower tier of lights. That such 
 lights are the lights of these two windows is evident from the 
 fact of their being the narrowest lights in the building, and that 
 the glass exactly fits them. 
 
 Let us, then, re-arrange the glass upon this supposition, and 
 put in No. 1 light what is now in No. 7 light ; in No. 2 what is 
 now in No. 8 ; in No. 3 what is now in No. 9 ; in No. 4 what is 
 now in No. 10 ; in No. 5 what is now in No. 11 ; in No. 6 what 
 is now in No. 12 ; leaving the glass in Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 
 and 18 as it now is ; and we shaU find the Apostles arranged in a 
 not uncommon order,^ and a perfect alternation preserved in 
 the forms of the canopies, and in the colouring of the designs, 
 throughout the upper tier of lights. Let us now put in No. 7 
 
 ^ It is possible that Nos. 15 and 17 the apostles would be arranged as at 
 
 are transposed. If St. Matthias were to Fairford church, Gloucestershire, with 
 
 take the place of St. Matthew, which the single exception that there St. 
 
 there is nothing in the order of the Matthew precedes St. Jude. 
 canopy design or colouring to prevent, 
 
142 
 
 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 light the glass which is in No. 20 light; in No. 8 the re- 
 mains of the canopy- work first mentioned in No. 1, and the 
 portion of the crucifix in No. 1 ; in No. 9 what is now in No. 4 ; 
 in No. 11 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in 
 No. 2, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 5 ; in No. 12 what 
 is now in No. 23 ; in No. 20 the remains of the canopy-work first 
 mentioned in No. 5, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 3; 
 and in No. 23 the remains of the canopy-work first mentioned in 
 No. 3, and the portion of the crucifix in No. 6 ; leaving No. 10 
 blank, and the glass in Nos. 19, 21, 22, and 24 as it now is ; 
 and we shall find, supposing the missing subject of No. 10 light 
 to have been a duplicate of that in No. 19,^ and that the remains 
 of the canopy-work first mentioned in No. 6 belonged to it, 
 that not only will a perfect alternation in the forms of the 
 canopies and the colouring of the subjects be preserved through- 
 out the east windows, in the one whether regarded in a hori- 
 zontal or in a perpendicular direction,^ in the other when 
 regarded in a horizontal direction — and it is obvious that a 
 double alternation might, by a different arrangement, be pro- 
 duced in this as well as in the former window — but that the 
 attitudes of the figures will correspond with the arrangement of 
 the subjects. Thus, the Virgin and St. John, if placed according 
 to the new arrangement in the lights Nos. 7 and 9, would 
 be turned towards the crucifix in No. 8 ; the Virgin in No. 10 
 light (which I have supplied by copying the figure in No. 19), 
 and the St. John put in No. 12 light, would be turned towards 
 
 ^ It is by no means an uncommon 
 occurrence to find in ancient glass the 
 same figures repeated in different or 
 even the same windows of the same 
 building. I know of an instance as 
 early as the latter part of the twelfth 
 century. 
 
 2 This alternation of design and 
 colour is observable in many early Per- 
 pendicular windows. The following 
 diagram may serve to explain my mean- 
 ing. Let the letters arranged in 
 AC a square represent four figures 
 B D and canopies : and let canopies 
 A and B each have a red spire- 
 ground, and blue niche tapestry ; and 
 canopies C and D each have a blue 
 spire-ground, and red niche tapestry. 
 It will follow that the masses of colour, 
 when regarded horizontally, will alter- 
 nate thus : — the red spire-ground of A 
 
 with the blue spire-ground of C; the 
 blue tapestry of A with the red tapestry 
 of C ; the red spire-ground of B with 
 the blue spire- ground of D ; the blue 
 tapestry of B with the red tapestry of 
 D. And when regarded vertically, the 
 masses of colour will alternate thus ; — 
 the red spire-ground of A with the 
 blue tapestry of A, this again with the 
 red spire-ground of B, and this again 
 with the blue tapestry of B ; and so, 
 the blue spire-ground of C with the red 
 tapestry of C, this with the blue spire- 
 ground of D, and this with the red 
 tapestry of D. Of course, if the cano- 
 pies A and D are of one design, and B 
 and C of another, their difierent pat- 
 terns will likewise alternate. To put 
 pi'ecisely the same case as that in the 
 text, the canopies must be supposed to 
 be of four different patterns. 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 143 
 
 the crucifix in No. 11 liglit; and the Virgins in Nos. 19 and 22, 
 and the St. Johns in Nos. 21 and 24, would be turned, respec- 
 tively, towards the crucifixes in Nos. 20 and 23 lights. 
 
 It is true that the portions of the founder's legend attached 
 to the glass now in Nos. 1, 4, 5, 20, and 23 lights, will not make 
 sense under the new arrangement of the subjects, but this 
 circumstance is entitled to no weight. The inscriptions on the 
 pedestals of Nos. 1 and 5 have evidently been made up of frag- 
 ments, and there is no reason why we should not suppose that those 
 on the pedestals of Nos. 4, 20, and 23 have likewise , been sup- 
 plied in the course of repairs. For it is impossible by any arrange- 
 ment of the subjects to bring the word written on the pedestal 
 of No. 20 into its proper place in the legend, or to arrange 
 matters so as to make both parts of the legend attached to the 
 pedestals of Nos. 4 and 23 fall into the inscription ; one part or 
 the other must be rejected as an insertion. On the other hand, 
 the parts of the legend attached to the pedestals now in the 
 lights Nos. 6, 19, 21, 22, and 24 will be found to read correctly 
 on the suggested re-arrangement of the subjects. The pedestal 
 in No. 3 light is, as before mentioned, at present without any 
 legend at all. 
 
 It is unnecessary to speculate on the reasons which may have 
 led to the fourfold repetition of the Crucifixion in the lower part 
 of tliese windows; but lest this repetition should appear un- 
 favourable to the view I take of the original arrangement of the 
 glass, I will add that no subject is more commonly represented 
 in a window above an altar than the Crucifixion, and that it is by 
 no means improbable that four altars, two under each window, 
 were placed against the east wall of the transept, or antechapel, 
 although no trace of them may now exist. 
 
 SOUTH WINDOW OF THE ANTECHAPEL. 
 
 This is a figure and canopy window like the windows on the 
 north side. 
 
 No. 1 light. Sc^s is written across the pedestal of 
 
 the canopy. The figure is that of a Bishop. The tapestry 
 of the niche is powdered with the letters P, crowned. 
 
 No. 2. Sc's Pelagius is written across the pedestal of the 
 canopy. The figure is that of a Pope, having a tiara encircled 
 with only one coronet. The niche tapestry is powdered with 
 letters P, crowned. 
 
 No. 3. Scs Alpliegus is written across the pedestal. The 
 
144 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 figure is that of an Archbishop. The niche tapestry is powdered 
 with letters A, crowned. 
 
 No. 4. Scs Gemreta is written across the pedestal. The figure 
 is that of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters 
 G, crowned. 
 
 No. 5. Scs Athanasius is written on the pedestal, which is 
 crossed by the following portion of the founder's legend : — Orate 
 p Willo. The figure is that of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is 
 powdered with letters A, crowned. 
 
 No. 6. Scs \Bar)i\ard^ is written on the pedestal, which is 
 crossed by the following portion of the founder's legend : — 
 Wynton fu^ d\atoTe\. The figure is habited as a monk, in a russet 
 dress. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters B, crowned. 
 
 No. 7. Scs appears on the pedestal, which is crossed by 
 
 the following part of the founder's legend: — Wynton ju'dator. 
 The figure is that of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is powdered 
 with letters H, crowned. 
 
 No. 8. Scs Anselmus is written on the pedestal, which is 
 crossed by the following part of the founder's legend: — Wyke- 
 ham, turned the wrong side upwards. The figure is that of an 
 aged man, wearing a green cap, gloves, an alb, and a russet 
 mantle over it. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters S 
 and letters A, crowned. 
 
 The tracery lights of this window, A to F inclusive, are each 
 filled with a canopy, under which stands an angel. Cherubim is 
 written upon a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the 
 lights A and B. The smaller tracery lights are filled with 
 foliage and monsters. 
 
 SOUTHERNMOST WEST WINDOW OF THE ANTECHAPEL. 
 
 This is likewise a figure and canopy window. 
 
 No. 1 light. On the pedestal is written Maria Egipcaca. 
 The figure is that of a female. The niche tapestry is powdered 
 with letters M, crowned. 
 
 No. 2. Sea Martha is written on the pedestal. The figure is 
 that of a female. TJie niche tapestry is powdered with letters M, 
 crowned. 
 
 No. 3. This light is a good deal mutilated. The pedestal is 
 inscribed Maria Jacobi, and the lower part of the niche tapestry 
 is pow^dered with letters M, crowned. But the figure itself is 
 that of a prophet, holding a scroll like the figures in the north 
 windows, inscribed visitabo oves meas ^ liberabo ea\s\. (See Ezekiel 
 
KEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AKD HALL, OXFOER 145 
 
 xxxiv. 12.) The remainder of the niche tapestry is powdered 
 \^ath letters E, crowned. 
 
 No. 4. This light is also much mutilated. The upper part of 
 the figure is that of a Queen, and the niche tapestry is powdered 
 with letters W, crowned. The lower part of the figure belongs 
 to a different subject. The pedestal is inscribed jScs Cutlibert\ 
 and is crossed by the followiug part of the founder's legend — 
 Orate v Willmo ; from which I conclude that this part of the 
 design belonged originally to a lower tier light of some window. 
 
 Ko. 5. Scs is written on the pedestal. The figure is that 
 
 of a Bishop. The niche tapestry is powdered with letters B, 
 crowned. A portion of the founder's legend, now missing, 
 crossed the pedestal. 
 
 No. 6. Sc's Bri is written on the pedestal. The 
 
 figure is, however, that of a female. The niche tapestry is 
 powdered with letters C and letters B, crowned. A portion of 
 the founder's legend, now missing, crossed the pedestal. 
 
 No. 7. The figure is that of a female. The niche tapestry is 
 powdered with letters E, crowned. A portion of the founder's 
 legend, now missing, crossed the pedestal. 
 
 No. 8. The figure is that of a Queen. The niche tapestry is 
 powdered with letters E, crowned. A portion of the founder's 
 legend, now missing, crossed the pedestal. 
 
 The tracery lights of this window, A to F inclusive, are each 
 filled with a canopy, under which stands an angel. Seraphim is 
 written upon a small scroll at the foot of each canopy in the 
 lights A and B. The smaller tracery lights are filled with 
 foHage and monsters, as in the other windows. 
 
 The present seems the most convenient place for offering a 
 few remarks on the date, style, and general effect of the oldest 
 or original glazing of the chapel. 
 
 In the absence of any direct information, we can arrive only 
 at an approximation to the date of this glass. That it was 
 erected in Wykeham's lifetime may be inferred, if not even from 
 the style of the legend which runs across the windows, and con- 
 tains the expression "Orate pro Willelmo de Wykeham," at 
 least from the fact of New College having been the first of 
 AVykeham's three great works, and the silence of liis will re- 
 specting its fabric; a will which, as is well known, contains 
 minute directions for the glazing of a part of Winchester 
 Cathedral. Indeed, the somewhat earlier character of the glass 
 as compared with the windows of Winchester College Chapel, 
 which have been copied faithfully, as it would seem, from the 
 
 L 
 
146 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 original glazing of that edifice, would justify the supposition that 
 it was erected before the commencement of Winchester College, 
 in 1387. On the whole, I think we shall not be far wrong in 
 concluding that the windows of New College were glazed between 
 the founding of the establishment in 1379, and its being taken 
 possession of by the first warden and fellows in 1386, at which 
 time we have reason to believe that the Chapel and Hall were 
 completed, and, if so, that the windows were glazed, for it is 
 true, as a general rule, that in mediaeval times the glaziers com- 
 menced operations as soon as any part of a building was ready 
 to receive the glass. 
 
 The glass, though Perpendicular in its general character, and 
 therefore to be regarded as one of the earliest, if not the earliest, 
 exponent of that style, displays, as might be expected, many 
 Decorated features, as in the design of some of the canopies, 
 especially as exemplified in the square tower over the niche 
 arch, from which the spire of the canopy rises; and even in 
 the pedestals used in the lower tier of lights, which, with the 
 small rayonnated sun on each side, bear considerable resemblance 
 to the pedestals of the early Decorated canopies in the Lady 
 Chapel windows of Wells Cathedral — in the coloured moulding 
 sometimes occurring under the battlements of the tower — in the 
 coloured windows of the spire — in the pot-metal yellow finials 
 occasionally employed — in the shape of the crockets — in the use 
 of fiesh-coloured glass to represent the nude parts of several of 
 the principal figures — in the white hair and beards, leaded into 
 pink faces, &c. Yet these, and many other Decorated features, 
 which a practised eye will not fail to detect, are, as it were, 
 merged in the general character of the later style, which displays 
 itself in the broad colouring of the windows, — in the general 
 flatness of the composition, which, by the way, is more remark- 
 able in the north, south, and west windows of the antechapel 
 than in the east windows, where the canopy spires are cut out 
 and surrounded with colour more completely, a circumstance 
 which once induced me to think that these canopies were of 
 earlier date than the rest, — in the preponderance of white and 
 yellow stained glass over the pot-metal colours, — and, though in 
 a less prominent degree, in the attitudes and draperies of most 
 of the figures, particularly those in the north, south, and west 
 windows — in the drawing, especially of the heads — in the thin- 
 ness of the black outlines — in the general softness and delicacy 
 of the execution, &c. Smear-shading is occasionally used in the 
 canopy- work, but the shadows are generally executed, if I mistake 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFOED. 147 
 
 not, in " Smear-shading stippled," an invention of the early part 
 of the fourteenth century, and which differs from "Stipple- 
 shading " (the mode commonly adopted in the fifteenth century) 
 in this, that the lights are left clear in the first instance, instead 
 of being picked out of a stippled ground of Enamel Brown, 
 spread uniformly over the glass. The granulation and depth of 
 the shading are perhaps best shown in the white robe of Eve in 
 the northernmost west wiudow ; but, even in this instance, the 
 shadow is not very coarsely stippled, nor can it be called deep 
 even in its deepest part. There is no instance, in any of the 
 windows, of the practice, adopted with such effect in later times, 
 of making the accidental varieties of depth common in a sheet 
 of coloured glass correspond in position with the lights and 
 shades of the picture ; and, though many parts of the composi- 
 tion are strongly contrasted in colour to others, yet tliis is not 
 sufScient to supply the want of deeper shadows and more 
 decided outlines, and secure the distinctness of the design, or 
 save the painting from the imputation of being little else than a 
 congeries of flat spots of white and coloured glass. 
 
 When, in addition to this defect, the imperfection of the figure 
 drawing^ and want of proper perspective in the canopies are 
 brought to mind, we are tempted to inquire what is it that 
 renders these windovrs so beautiful, so infinitely more agreeable 
 than those of modern times. It cannot be their discoloration, 
 for modern windows that have been as much discoloured fail to 
 please. The secret lies in the fine tone and harmony of their 
 colouring; and, perhaps I may venture to add, in its perfect 
 keeping wdth the architectural character of the building. There 
 is not a harsh or discordant hue anywhere. The whole colouring 
 
 ^ Should it be objected that most of the-box ; or Samson slaying the Lion, 
 these figures possess a certain degree by a clown who, with much grimace 
 of sublimity, I would respectfully warn and affected violence, caresses the royal 
 my readers of the danger there is of beast — as in his brother's windows at 
 engendering a false taste by recurring Christ Church, Oxford, and the late Ex- 
 to such models for sublimity. Nothing hibition ; or, I may add, than the cat's- 
 is more true than that from the sub- eyed saints of Messrs. Pugin and Hard- 
 lime to the ridiculous there is but a man ? Enthusiastic amateurs should 
 step. What can be more absurd, for recollect that they tolerate such things 
 instance, than the mode of representing at the risk of being laughed at by the 
 the Passage of the Eed Sea by a caper- veiy persons they employ. "Work of 
 ing figure betwixt two cauliflowers; or this description is even now nick-named, 
 the Plagues of Egypt by so many car- in derision, hogie-v:ork by the glaziers' 
 cases, frogs and fish, &c., sprawling in a men. If sublimity is aimed at, we may 
 plate— as in the late M. Gerente's win- be sure it will not be reached simply 
 dow at Ely ; or the Raising of Lazarus, by rectifying the more palpable anato- 
 by a mummy jumping up like Jack-in- mical faults of the mediaeval artists. 
 
 L 2 
 
148 
 
 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 is equally quiet and subdued, and is in entire agreement with 
 the silvery grey of the white glass. It is without doubt to the 
 excellent tone of the latter material that this satisfactory result 
 is owing. For this same white glass, which has no modern 
 representative,^ forms the base of all the coloured glasses, and 
 
 ^ As I still meet with occasional as- 
 sertions to the contrary, I think it is as 
 well to repeat what I have constantly- 
 stated, that modern glass differs from 
 old both in tone, colour, and texture, 
 and this more widely in proportion to 
 the difference of date ; the nearest 
 resemblance, though by no means an 
 exact one, being between modern glass 
 and that of the sixteenth century, and 
 the greateat difference being between it 
 and the glass of the twelfth, thirteenth, 
 and fourteenth centuries ; and further, 
 that the attempts hitherto made to dis- 
 guise this difference have completely 
 failed. I am able to make this asser- 
 tion more positively, since it is borne 
 out by certain chemical experiments 
 which I have caused to be instituted 
 during the last two years, the result of 
 which I hope, ere long, to make known 
 through the medium of this Journal. 
 I, of course, should not be expected to 
 notice any opinion of the writers in the 
 * Ecclesiologist ' on a subject of this kind ; 
 nor should I now allude to them, if it 
 were not to guard those who may be as 
 inexperienced or as careless observers 
 as themselves from the danger of being 
 misled by the misrepresentation of a 
 matter of fact which occurs in the fol- 
 lowing passage: — '''Mr. Winston re- 
 minds us that * no cleaning is able to 
 deprive ancient glass, of a certain date, 
 of its tone, richness, and general ap- 
 pearance.' This we entirely deny. The 
 east window of Bristol, v:hich is of middle- 
 pointed date, has been lately cleaned, 
 and it is neither better nor worse than 
 Messrs. Wailes, or O'Connor, or Wille- 
 ment would produce. Rich is just what 
 it is not," &c. &c. It unfoi'tunately 
 happens that about two-thirds of the 
 Bristol window consists of modern glass. 
 But the appeal to it is not useless, as it 
 serves to show that an ability to distin- 
 guish modern from ancient glass is not 
 a necessary qualification for an adept in 
 
 the mysteries of ecclesiology. Of the 
 various expedients resorted to for imi- 
 tating the effect of the ancient material, 
 Messrs. Powell's and Messrs. Hartley's 
 processes for roughening the surfaces 
 of the glass are the most successful, 
 thoxxgh but expedients after all. " An- 
 tiquating the glass," i. e. dulling it 
 with enamel colour in imitation of dirt 
 and the rust of age, is commonly re- 
 sorted to as a means of destroying the 
 perfect pellucidness of the modern ma- 
 terial : a quality resulting from refine- 
 ments in the manufacture. Instead, 
 however, of making the glass look thick 
 and rich like the old, it only makes 
 it dull and heavy in effect : nor does it 
 materially improve its tone of colour. 
 Of three imitations of ancient glass in 
 the late Exhibition, which I particularly 
 examined, one by M. Lusson, which 
 had been the most antiquated, was the 
 least watery in effect. The second, by 
 M. Gerente, which also had been anti- 
 quated, though in a less degree, was, in 
 proportion, more flimsy. The last, by 
 Messrs. Pugin and Hardman, which had 
 not been antiquated at all, was the most 
 flimsy and watery. But they were all 
 inferior to ancient glass in richness, 
 depth, and particularly in tone of 
 colour ; as was indeed easily shown by 
 holding clear pieces of ancient glass 
 beside them. M. Lusson's, on the whole, 
 was decidedly the best imitation, but 
 this was not owing to the greater anti- 
 quating of the glass. I am surprised 
 that the eyes of the public are not yet 
 open to the absurdity of literally copy- 
 ing designs of an early period in a mate- 
 rial so different from that in which such 
 designs were originally worked, and 
 with reference to which we may sup- 
 pose they were made. We might as 
 well expect a literal copy, in wood, of 
 a stone spire, or of a wooden spire in 
 stone, to produce a satisfactory effect. 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 149 
 
 consequently imparts to tliem its own hue ; of the actual depth 
 and greenness of which we are not aware so long as the white is 
 intermixed with cool blues, reds, purples, and apparently though 
 not really faded greens, as in the antechapel windows; but 
 which surprises us when fully brought out by contrast with a 
 warmer scale of colouring, as will hereafter be shown to be done 
 in some of the south windows of the nave. Without expecting 
 a ready acquiescence in the opinion hazarded, that a part of the 
 pleasure excited by the colouring of these windows arises from a 
 perception of its harmony with the architectural character of the 
 building, I cannot but think that the idea is less fanciful than 
 may at first appear. There is a gloominess in the style of 
 Gothic ecclesiastical architecture which is very much opposed, 
 not indeed to rich, but to warm and gay colouring. And though 
 this gloominess in the present instance is, to a certain extent, 
 disguised by the elegance of the modern fittings, and the warmth 
 of the yellow wash with which the walls of the antechapel and 
 choir are covered, it still exists, and grows upon the eye in pro- 
 portion as the building is contemplated ; and the more fully the 
 gloominess of the architecture is perceived, the less striking does 
 the cold colouring of the antechapel windows appear, until at 
 last it seems more appropriate to the place than the warmer and 
 gayer colouring of the windows of the choir. 
 
 I now proceed to give a short account of the glass in the 
 choir windows, beginning with the first window from the east, 
 on the south side. 
 
 The tradition is, that all the glass in the south windows is 
 Flemish, and the work of Rubens' scholars.^ But this does not 
 appear to be altogether correct. A great many of the figures in 
 the lower lights are, it is true, the work of foreign artists, and, 
 in the absence of any certain information, I am inclined to think 
 of the Flemish school, in the latter part of the sixteenth, or early 
 part of the seventeenth century. But the whole of the canopy- 
 work, which is evidently copied from glass of similar design to 
 that in the antechapel, is, except those portions of it that 
 actually are of Wykeham's time, of comparatively a recent 
 date ; at which period the rest of the large figures appear to 
 have been painted, some of the old ones supplied with heads, 
 
 ' Gutch, in a note to Wood's ' History Flemish, done, as is reported, from de- 
 
 of the Colleges and Halls of Oxford,' signs given by some scholars of Rubens, 
 
 p. 199, says the windows on the south and were purchased, by the society, of 
 
 side of the chapel were originally Wm. Price, who repaired them in 1740. 
 
150 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 and almost the whole of the old glass, not only the Flemish, but 
 the remains of the original glazing in the tracery lights, as well 
 as in the lower lights, retouched. Coupling these facts with the 
 inscription at the bottom of the last window from the east, which 
 records the fact that W. Price repaired these windows in 1740, 
 I can come to no other conclusion than that the greater part of 
 the glazing is the work of Price, who adapted the Flemish 
 figures to the lights. 
 
 THE FIRST SOUTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 All the figures in the lower lights of this window appear to 
 have been painted by Price. Some represent Bishops, Arch- 
 bishops, and a Pope, but no names are given. Some are 
 canonised saints. Five of the crozier-heads, and a great part 
 of the canopy-hoods,^ are of the same date as the ancient glass in 
 the antechapel. The glass of which these remains are com- 
 posed, which in the antechapel would seem to be white, here 
 appears to be a positive dark green, from contrast with the 
 warm colours that surround it, and particularly from its being 
 opposed to the warm grey or light sky-blue used as a spire-back 
 to the canopies. The founder's legend, in modern glass, is 
 carried along the bottom of this, as well as of the other south 
 windows. 
 
 The execution of the painting is very lieavy. There are 
 scarcely any clear lights.^ Tlie shadows are not stippled, but 
 
 ^ It is not easy to conceive what as in the windows of the antechapel, 
 
 motive could have induced Price to were wont to make both figures and 
 
 work up any part of the ancient mate- canopies equally, or almost equally, flat, 
 
 rials. In reshading the old canopy- After all, the fault rests with the ama- 
 
 hoods, so as to make them harmonize teurs, without whose countenance such 
 
 with the powerfully-shaded figures be- extravagances could not be committed, 
 
 neath, he has however shown himself a ^ j^; ig difiicult, no doubt, to prescribe 
 
 better artist than the majority of the the extent to which, in painting glass, 
 
 modern imitators of ancient glass, who the material may be obscured, or the 
 
 seldom scruple to clap a deeply-shaded high lights subdued with enamel colour, 
 
 figure below, it cannot be said beneath, without violating the fundamental con- 
 
 a canopy as flat in effect as the material ditions of this branch of ai-t : and I 
 
 on which it is painted actually is. This would recommend any one, who really 
 
 defect might be observed in many of feels an interest in the subject, to sus- 
 
 the specimens in the late Exhibition, pend his judgment until he has had 
 
 It seems to result from a habit of copy- an opportunity of actually examining 
 
 ing the figures from ancient MSS., and and comparing a vai'iety of painted 
 
 the canopies from ancient painted glass, windows. Without, however, attempt- 
 
 For if both were alike copied from old ing to lay down any rule, I think I 
 
 windows, our imitators could hardly may venture to say, that if a picture in 
 
 fail to observe that the mediaeval artists, painted glass appears to be, on the 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 151 
 
 hatched, as in an oil-painting ; and, besides being always muddy, 
 are frequently too deep. The shade of the interior of the 
 canopy niche is absolutely black. The colouring is in general 
 raw. The blue is of an unpleasant purple hue, but the ruby, as 
 is not uncommonly the case in Price's works, is as scarlet as that 
 of the fifteenth century, but of a rawer tone, through being made 
 on a purer white base. Enamel blue is employed in some of the 
 draperies and smaller ornaments, and a red enamel, like china- 
 red, for the flesh-colour, but in general pot-metal colours are 
 used. It is to this circumstance principally that the superior 
 effect of the south, as compared with the north windows of the 
 nave, is owing. 
 
 The tracery lights are of the same design as those of the ante- 
 chapel windows. A figure and canopy occupies each from A to 
 F inclusive, and various ornaments the smaller lights. The 
 figures are of Price's time, but parts of the original glazing occur 
 in the canopies, and in the smaller lights. The word cherubyny 
 at the bottom of the canopies A and B, is in each instance on an 
 ancient piece of glass. 
 
 THE SECOND SOUTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 I am inclined to think that all the figures in the lower lights 
 of this window, and certainly that all their heads, are Price's. 
 A Bishop and a Cardinal are represented, as well as ordinary 
 
 whole, as brilliant and transparent as one hand, the opinion of most modern 
 an equal extent of plain glazing of the artists, that a glass-painting ought to 
 same date as itself, we may be sure that be a dull transparency — as exemplified, 
 the obscuration of the material has not for instance, in the windows of St. Ger- 
 been carried too far; and if, in addi- main I'Auxerrois, Paris; and, as may 
 tion, when considered with reference to be recollected, in the majority of the 
 its design, it betrays no incompleteness works sent to the late Exhibition ; — on 
 of effect, we may be satisfied that the the other hand, the abortive attempts 
 obscuration of the material has been of modern imitators of old glass to re- 
 carried quite far enough, a standard present canopy-hoods, and other pro- 
 which by no means excludes all but jecting work, landscapes, &c., without 
 picture glass-paintings executed in an the aid of shadows, linear or aerial per- 
 absolutely flat manner ; since it is com- spective, as shown, on the whole perhaps 
 pletely attained by any good specimen most consistently, in the glass-paintings 
 of the period between 1530 and 15i0, of Messrs. Pugin and Hardman ; leav- 
 though adequately representing canopy- ing, as a matter entirely irrespective 
 work, or even the interior of a building, of the question at issue, the choice 
 as by the flattest Gothic picture : whilst whether of a flat, hut artistic, or more 
 many a modern glass-painting, of the rotund manner of representation, to be 
 flattest possible design, such as an orna- determined by the good taste of the 
 mental pattern, will be found to fall artist and the nature of the subject, 
 below it. It equally condemns, on the 
 
152 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 saints, but no names are given. Three of the crozier-heads, and 
 large portions of the canopy-work, are of Wykeham's time. The 
 glass of which they are composed, as in the former window, looks 
 perfectly green. The tracery lights are of the same general 
 design as the last. A good deal of the canopy-work, &c., and 
 the whole of one or two of the figures, which are simply angels, 
 are original, as is the word Bnacoes, which is written under each 
 of the canopies A and B. The old blue tapestry-ground is 
 retained in one of the lights. This appears quite cold and 
 greenish in hue, on comparison with the glass in the lower 
 lights. 
 
 THE THIRD SOUTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 Price seems to have painted the figures in the upper tier of 
 lower lights, at all events, if not some of those in the lower tier. 
 He has retouched them all. Amongst them are represented 
 Bishops, Patriarchs, and three female figures. One of the 
 crozier-heads is of Wykeham's time, and there are some original 
 pieces in the canopy-hoods. All the angels in the tracery lights 
 are Price's work. There are fragments of the original glazing in 
 the canopies and in the smaller lights, and the original inscrip- 
 tion Seraphyn remains in the lights A and B. The figures are 
 those of angels. 
 
 THE FOURTH SOUTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 The figures represented in the lower lights are a Pope, an 
 Archbishop, St. John the Evangelist, another male saint, St. 
 Catherine, and three female saints. The heads of three of the 
 male figures are by Price, and St. Catherine's head is a copy of 
 the head in light No. 5 of the next window; but, with these 
 exceptions, the figures appear to be of Flemish workmanship. 
 
 Parts of the angels in the tracery lights are original, but have 
 been retouched. The original inscription, Troni, appears in the 
 lights A and B. Some of the blue niche tapestry is old, and 
 appears very cold in comparison with the modern blue. The 
 smaller tracery lights are original. 
 
 THE FIFTH SOUTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 Amongst the figures represented in the lower lights are a 
 Pope, two Kings, a Bishop, and three female saints, one of whom 
 holds a cross, another a sword. These appear to be Flemish, 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 153 
 
 and are more artistical than Price's. The male heads are entirely- 
 free from that vulgar air which is so lamentable in his work ; 
 they are also less wrinkled, and more fleshy. The female heads 
 are delicate and pleasing, but, like the male heads, have too 
 much an air of pretdness to suit the character of a monumental 
 work. In point of execution, the work resembles Price's : about 
 the same proportion of enamel colouring is used, and the same 
 mode of shading is adopted ; but the shadows are more delicate 
 than his, and the colouring of the draperies is better in tone. 
 At the bottom of the light Xo. 8 is the inscription before referred 
 to — W. Price has fenestras reparavit, Ao. Dni. 1740. 
 
 Host of the figures in the tracery lights (simple angels) are 
 original, but have been retouched. The greater part of the 
 canopy-work is also original ; and the original inscription, Prin- 
 cipat\ remains at the bottom of the lights A and B. 
 
 The north wmdows ^ will not require a detailed notice of any 
 but the tracery lights, in which alone any part of the original 
 glazing is preserved. It appears, from an inscription in the first 
 window from the east, that the glass in the lower lights was 
 painted by W. Peckitt, in 1765; and certainly one cannot but 
 perceive how much the art of glass-j)ainting had deteriorated 
 since the days of Price. The general design is the same as that 
 of the south windows. A figure under a canopy occupies each 
 light; but the figui-es are poorly di-awn, and the canopies are 
 weakly designed, except the bases of those in the lower tier of 
 lights, which, with the founder's legend that crosses them, are 
 copied from the old ones in the antechapel. Their enamel blue 
 spire-ground produces a flimsy eflect, and the colouring of the 
 windows generally is inferior to that of the south windows. 
 Some pot-metal, and much enamel-coloured glass, is used in the 
 draperies; as well as stained red, and some bad, heav}'-tinted, 
 streaky ruby, much resembling the ruby used by Peckitt in the 
 east window of Lincoln Cathedral, which was painted by him in 
 1762. The shading is muddy, there are no clear lights, and the 
 deep shadows ai*e quite black. Our Saviour, the Virgin Mar}-, 
 the Twelve Apostles, St. Paul, and St. Barnabas, are represented 
 
 ^ The following account of these win- Old Testament, from Adam to Moses ; 
 
 dows is given by Gutch, in a note to in the upper, twelve of the prophets. 
 
 Wood, p. 199: "The windows on the Mr. Rebecca gave the designs for these, 
 
 north side, done by ^Mr. Peckitt, of In the two other windows are our 
 
 York, in 1765 and 1774. The three Saviom-, the Yii-gin Mary, and the 
 
 nearest the screen contain in the lower Twelve Apostles." 
 range the chief persons recorded in the 
 
154 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 in the two first windows from the east ; and a series of prophets, 
 patriarchs, and wortliies, ending with Adam and Eve, in the 
 other windows. Under the figure of the Virgin, in the second 
 window from the east, is the following coat: — Argent, on a 
 chevron, sable, three quatrefoils, or; and on a scroll beneath is 
 written, Johannes Eyre, Arm., Hujus Hosp. Soc, 
 
 TEACEKY LIGHTS. — FIKST NORTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 The glass in these lights is original. A female figure holding 
 a lamp, under a canopy, occupies each of the lights A to F 
 inclusive. Vir gines is written across the base of each of the 
 canopies A and B. In the smaller tracery lights are monsters, 
 or foliaged ornaments, as in the antechapel windows. 
 
 SECOND NORTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 The glazing in the tracery lights of this window is also 
 original. An angel under a canopy fills each of the lights A to 
 F inclusive. At the foot of A and B respectively is written 
 Angeli. The smaller lights are ornamented in the same way as 
 those of the last window. 
 
 THIRD NORTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 The glazing of the tracery lights of this window is likewise 
 original. An angel under a canopy is represented in each of 
 the lights A to F inclusive ; and at the foot of A and B respec- 
 tively is written Archangeli. The smaller tracery lights are 
 ornamented as before. 
 
 FOURTH NORTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 The glazing of the tracery lights of this window is also 
 original. An angel completely armed in plate, or cuir houilli, 
 but bare-headed, holding a battle-axe in his left hand, and a 
 spear, with a square pennon bearing a plain cross, in his right, 
 under a canopy, is represented in the lights A to F inclusive. 
 The following is written, one half in light A, the other half in 
 light B : Vir tutes. By some mistake the halves have been 
 transposed in the window. 
 
 FIFTH NORTH WINDOW FROM THE EAST. 
 
 The glass in the tracery lights of this window is also original. 
 In each of the lights A to F inclusive, is a canopy, under which 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 155 
 
 is an angel, with legs and arms entirely enclosed in plate, or 
 cuir houilli; wearing a jupon and sword-belt, a tippet of ermine 
 round his neck, and a sort of fur cap on liis head. He holds a 
 long baton in his left hand. In some of the examples the baton 
 has a short spike at the top, like that usually represented at the 
 butt end of a staff. At the bottom of liglits A. and B respec- 
 tively is written Potestates. 
 
 In noticing the great west window of the antechapel,^ it is 
 not my intention to enlarge on its defects. These have been 
 pithily summed up by a distinguished artist,^ to whom I refer 
 the reader. I fully admit then- existence, and regard this work 
 as a great misapplication of art. Its most unfortunate effect has 
 been to produce an unfounded prejudice against the application 
 of art to glass-painting, and occasion a revulsion of feeling among 
 amateurs. Every one has felt the justice of Horace Walpole's 
 sneer at the washy Virtues of Sir Joshua : but, it cannot be denied, 
 on the opposite side, that the tendency of the present age to 
 dispense with all artistic qualities in the pursuit of windows 
 which shall display an abundance of strong and gaudy colouring, 
 is an error leading to still more pernicious consequences. It is 
 true that certain writers who follow the popular delusion^ occa- 
 sionally, and, to save appearances, talk about the necessity for a 
 display of art in painted windows, but, on examining the examples 
 they indicate as models, we perceive that a display of very low 
 art indeed is sufficient to satisfy their demands. Leaving, then, 
 these blind guides, let us recollect that, though our climate and 
 habits may forbid the employment of fresco-painting to any 
 great extent, yet that there exists in our windows as favourable 
 a field for artistic development, though subject to different con- 
 ditions, as in an equal breadth of wall ; that ancient windows, 
 except in the case of mere restorations, are worthy of being 
 
 ^ Gutch, in a note to Wood, p. 199, little green pot-metal glass is used in 
 
 states that "for this work, which was this gi'oup. The rest of the painting is 
 
 begun about the year 1777, finished car- executed with enamel colours and stains. 
 
 toons were fui^nished by Sir Joshua Some of the lower figures have a peai'ly 
 
 Reynolds, and then were copied by !^L.^ effect ; but they are not sufficiently 
 
 Jervais." I recollect seeing Sir Joshua's sepai^ated from the ground of the 
 
 original sketch some years ago at the window, either by colour or by shadow. 
 
 British Institution. It was richly ^ i^ the "Winchester volume of the 
 
 coloured. The subject consists of the Proceedings of the Ai-chseological Insti- 
 
 Adoration of the Shepherds, in the tute, " William of Wykeham," p. 30. 
 
 lights of the upper tier ; with a single ^ See, amongst others, the ' Eccle- 
 
 figure occupying each light of the lower siologist,' and 'Morning Chronicle,' 
 
 tier, except the centre one, which con- 2:)assim. 
 tains a group representing Charity. A 
 
156 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 copied only so far as regards the composition and colour of tlieir 
 material; and that, so long as we are content to see produced 
 year after year windows immeasurably inferior in all respects to 
 the works of foreign artists (works, by the way, far from being 
 perfect models themselves, — as, for instance, the window lately 
 erected at Brussels Cathedral, by Capronnier ; those at Cologne 
 or Munich ; or the specimens sent to the late Exhibition,^ by 
 Capronnier, Bertini, and others), so long may we expect in vain 
 any improvement in the art to take place. 
 
 The painted glass in the Hall windows, of which there are 
 three on the south and four on the north side — the hall running 
 in the same line as the chapel — consists of coats of arms exclu- 
 sively. The following shields are of the same date as the 
 original glazing in the chapel. 
 
 In the third window from the east on the north side — Argent, 
 between two chevroiis sable, three roses or. — William of Wykeham. 
 The shield is of the transitional character which prevailed on the 
 confines of the Perpendicular style. The diaper closely resembles 
 some ornament of similar date in the first window from the east, 
 of the north chancel aisle, St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury. 
 Each of the roses (which are turned the wrong side outwards) 
 has a yellow centre, formed by grinding away the coloured 
 surface of the ruby, here thin and smooth, and staining the 
 white glass yellow. This is the earliest instance that I have 
 yet met with of the practice. 
 
 Azure, a sword and key saltier wise, argent, in chief; a mitre of 
 the second. — The ancient arms of the See of Winchester. See 
 the seal of William of Waynflete, engraved in his Life by 
 
 ^ It is unfortunate that the oppor- et critique des Verres, Vitraux, Cristaux, 
 tunity so fairly offered of leading the composant la Classe XXIV. de I'Expo- 
 public taste in a right direction by the sition universelle de 1851 ' (Weale), 
 award of the Fine Arts (No. XXX.) very naturally expresses himself at a 
 Jury, on the painted-glass in the late loss to discover on what principle the 
 Exhibition, has been so completely prizes were adjusted. [See p. 41, note; 
 thrown away. The worthlessness of the see also p. 52, note.] Most of my 
 awai-d must be evident to any one who readers are aware that M. Bontemps has 
 really examined the specimens. It is, had great experience in painted glass 
 however, not singular that the work during upwards of thirty years, and 
 of Capronnier did not only receive no that he was elected an assessor of the 
 prize, but was not even considered Jury XXIV. Section B of the above- 
 worthy of mention, by judges who dis- mentioned pamphlet contains very just, 
 covered so much merit in the works though perhaps occasionally too good- 
 exhibited by Grerente, Pugin and Hai-d- natured criticiams on the glass-paintinga 
 man, Howe, Wailes, and O'Connor. M. that were exhibited. 
 Bontemps, in his ' Examen historique 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 157 
 
 Chandler. The same bearing occurs in one of the windows 
 of the choir clearstory of Winchester Cathedral. This building- 
 is dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, from whose emblems the 
 coat is principally composed. 
 
 In the second window from the east, on the north side — 
 Argent, a cross gules. St. George. 
 
 Quarterly, 1st and 4th. Azure, seme de Us, or. 
 
 2nd and 3rd. Chiles, three lions passant guardant in pale, or. — 
 King Eichard II. 
 
 In the first window from the east, on the south side — Gules, 
 three crowns in pale, or. This coat has been assigned to several 
 imaginary personages, as, for instance, the King of Crekeland. 
 The panel surrounding the shield is coeval with it. It is not 
 improbable that the other shields were originally suiTOunded 
 with similar panels, and that these were inserted in lights 
 having ornamental borders, and a ground of ornamental quarries. 
 The ruby of the field is thin and smooth on the sheet, as, 
 indeed, is all that in the antechapel windows. The border of 
 the panel is shaded with smear-shading, stippled. 
 
 The remaining coats are of the time of Henry YIII. Some 
 are fine examples of the period. 
 
 In the first window from the east, on the south side — Argent, 
 on a chevron gules, between three pellets, a cock of the first. Over a 
 fillet, vert, a chief of the first, charged with a double rose of the 
 second, between two leopards' faces, azure. The shield, which is 
 within a wreath, is surmounted by a mitre. — John Longland, 
 Bishop of Lincoln from 1520 to 1547. 
 
 In the second window from the east, on the south side — Party 
 per f ess or, and gules; a demi-rose and demi-sun conjoined, counter- 
 changed of the field. Issuant from the demi-rose is the neck of a 
 double-headed eagle sable, and from each side of the rose issues an 
 eagles wing displayed, of the last. The shield is within a 
 wreath much mutilated. It was originally surmounted by a 
 Cardinal's hat, of which only the strings remain. Wood declares 
 that these arms were given by the Emperor Maximilian to 
 AYilliam Kniglit, a Fellow of the College; Gutcli adds, by 
 letters patent, dated 20th July, 1514; and that he was made 
 Bishop of Bath and Wells in 1541. It is difficult to reconcile 
 the existence of the Cardinal's hat with this statement, except 
 on the supposition that it formed part of the original grant of 
 arms. 
 
 Quarterly, 1st. Argent, a pelican in a nest, feeding her young 
 ones, vert. 
 
158 THE PAINTED GLASS IN 
 
 2nd and 3rd. Argent, a lion rampant, vert. 
 
 4th. Argent, an eagle displayed, vert. — Robert Sherburne, 
 Bishop of Chichester from 1508 to 1536. The first quarter of 
 the arms is much mutilated. 
 
 In the third window from the east, on the south side— The 
 arms of Edward Prince of Wales (afterwards King Edward VI.), 
 within a wreath, and surmounted by a coronet. The second and 
 third quarters are lost. 
 
 Azure, on a cross, or, between four griffins' heads erased, argent, 
 a rose gules. The shield is within a garter, and is surmounted 
 by a mitre. — Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester from 
 1531 to 1550, and from 1553 to 1555. 
 
 In the fourth window from the east, on the north side — Azure, 
 an episcopal staff, or, surmounted hy a pall argent, charged with 
 jour crosses patS fitche, sable: impaling gules, afess, or ; in chief, 
 a goafs head argent; in base, three escallops of the last. — William 
 AVarham, Archbishop of Canterbury from 1504 to 1532. The 
 arms are within a wreath, and surmounted by a mitre. 
 
 The arms of King Henry YIII., supported by a red dragon 
 and white greyhound. 
 
 The complicated charges and high finish of these coats, as well 
 as the delicate texture of their material, contrast strongly with 
 the more simple and more boldly executed shields of the time of 
 Wykeham. 
 
 Other arms, mentioned by Wood in his 'History of the 
 Colleges and Halls of Oxford,' have disappeared. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTAKY NOTE. 
 
 (From the Archseological Journal, vol. ix. p. 120.) 
 
 It has occurred to me, in reference to the memoir on the painted 
 glass in New College Chapel and Hall, Oxford, that I may assist 
 the researches of others by mentioning that there are eleven species 
 of original canopies existing in the lower lights of the windows of 
 the antechapel, and of the south windows of the choir; and by 
 showing their present arrangement by the following diagrams, in 
 which each species of canopy is indicated by Eoman numerals. 
 From these diagrams, and the foregoing paper, it will appear that 
 the arrangement of the glass is more perfect, and most to be relied 
 on as original, in the northernmost west window of the ante- 
 chapel. 
 
 C. W. 
 
NEW COLLEGE CHAPEL AND HALL, OXFORD. 
 
 159 
 
 Northernmost West Win- 
 dow of the Antechapel. 
 
 First North Window of Second North Window of 
 
 the Antechapel from the Antechapel from 
 
 the West. the West. 
 
 II I 
 
 III i IV i III ; IV. ! 
 
 ! 
 I II III n 
 
 III 
 
 V 
 
 V 
 
 V 
 
 I 
 
 II 1 V n 
 
 m 
 
 lu j m 1 
 
 South Window of the Southernmost of the Win- Northernmost East Window of 
 Antechapel. dows of the Antechapel. the Antechapel. 
 
 I 
 
 I I II ' 
 
 1 V V ; V i V 
 
 i 1 
 
 I 11 I I 
 
 VI i II III, 
 
 i ^ 
 
 X 
 
 X 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 IX 
 
 1 V 
 
 Ji_ 
 
 VI 
 
 IX 
 
 I 
 
 V 
 
 "x~ 
 
 
 X 
 
 
 ~x~ 
 
 ! 
 
 X 
 
 vu 
 
 vm 
 
 vm 
 
 vm 
 
 VII 
 
 vm 
 
 Fii-st, Second, and Third Fourth and Fifth South 
 Southernmost East Window of South Windows of the Windows of the Choir 
 
 the Antechapel, Choir from the East. from the East. 
 
 VII 
 IX 
 
 VIII 
 IX 
 
 vn 
 
 vm 
 
 vn 
 
 VIII 
 
 IX 
 
 IX 
 
 IX 
 
 rv 
 
 I ! 
 
 IV i I IV 
 
 n XI 1 n XI 
 
 IV I I 
 
 III XI III XI 
 
VI. 
 
 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT BEISTOL, WELLS, 
 GLOUCESTER AND EXETEK. 
 
 (From the volume of the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at 
 Bristol, 1851.) 
 
 ^ Y principal object in writing this Paper is to call 
 attention to the remains of painted glass in 
 Bristol Catliedral and the Mayor's Chapel ; but 
 as Wells, Gloucester, and Exeter Cathedrals 
 are easy of access from Bristol, and contain 
 many interesting specimens of painted glass, I 
 have been induced to include in this sketch a 
 short notice of the remains existing in those edi- 
 fices, in the hope that it may prove useful to such persons as 
 are inclined to pursue the subject further. I do not pretend to 
 do more than call attention to these interesting specimens ; to 
 examine them at length would occupy too much time ; and, I 
 should add, that, not having visited Bristol and Exeter since 
 1849, Wells since 1848, and Gloucester since 1846, the remarks 
 I am about to offer must be taken as applicable to the state 
 of the glass at those periods respectively. 
 
 I propose to notice: — 1st, the Bristol glass; 2ndly, the Wells; 
 Srdly, the Gloucester; and, lastly, the Exeter. 
 
 The first window that claims our attention is the east window 
 of Bristol Cathedral. In 1847 it underwent a judicious restora- 
 tion, in course of which the encrusted dirt was removed, which 
 obscured the glass, and rendered the more delicate ornaments 
 invisible, such as the diaper patterns in the arms and the border 
 of the window. The ancient glass was scrupulously retained, 
 and modern used only to supply actual deficiencies ; so that this 
 window has lost nothing of its interest by being restored. 
 
 A great deal of modern glass was necessarily employed in the 
 lower lights, and in the three upright lights in the upper part of 
 the window, the design of the modern glass being taken, as much 
 as possible, from the original fragments now worked up in those 
 lights, and from the slight sketch given of the window in Lyson's 
 
ON THE PAINTED GLAJSS AT BRISTOL, ETC. 161 
 
 ' Gloucestershii-e.' ^ The remainder of the window, however, is 
 filled with the original glazing. The old work, throughout, may 
 be easily distinguished from the new, by the different texture of 
 the glass. 
 
 The window represents a stem of Jesse. The lower liglits 
 contain figures of the Virgin and Infant Jesus, as well as prophets 
 and kings ; in several of which figures portions of the original 
 glazing may be observed. Each figure is enclosed in an oval 
 panel, formed by the ramifications of a vine branch. Some of 
 the foliao:ed scrolls in the heads of the lower lio-hts ('which are 
 principally original)^ are remarkably graceful in design. The 
 ancient ruby ground of the scrolls is enriched by the unusual 
 addition of a diaper pattern. Diaper patterns, indeed, are used 
 with remarkable profusion in this window, and, being executed 
 with uncommon boldness, are exceedingly effective. The figures 
 and scrolls again present themselves in the three upright lights 
 in the upper part of the window, in the centre one of which is 
 represented the crucified Saviour, and in the two others the 
 Blessed Virgin and St. John the Evangelist ; original parts of all 
 these figures remain. 
 
 The design of the glass in the tracery lights is made to har- 
 monise completely with that of the lower lights, by the introduc- 
 tion, by way of ornament, of scrolls of foliage into the principal 
 openings. The heads of Prophets, or Patriarchs, are even 
 inserted in the middle of eight of the smaller tracery lights : 
 these heads are the only part of the design which cannot be 
 easily made out from the floor of the choir. The black letter 
 monogram, fi ^. C, in one of the spandrels, should be noticed as 
 being evidently an insertion ; it is painted on later glass than 
 the rest. In the upper tracery lights is a display of heraldry, of 
 singular excellence, by the aid of which we may, perhaps, venture 
 to refer the date of the glass to the latter part of the reign of 
 Edward 11. 
 
 The absence of Gaveston's arms from the window proves, I 
 think, conclusively, that the glass was put up after the murder 
 of that favourite in 1312 ; and the presence of the Earl of Here- 
 ford's arms appears to afford some evidence that the glass was 
 put up before 1322, in which year Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of 
 Hereford, was slain in open rebellion against his sovereign. At 
 all events, I think it clear that the glass was put up before the 
 
 ' See Lyson's ' Gloucestersliire,' plate xcii. 
 
 - One is given in Lyson's ' Gloxicestershire,' plate xeiii. 
 
1 62 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT 
 
 ascendancy of Mortimer, Queen Isabella's favourite ; for not only 
 are his arms omitted, but those of two of his victims are present: 
 viz., of Edmund Fitzalan, Earl of Arundel, who was put to death 
 in 132G ; and of Le Despencer, or Spencer, who also perished in 
 the same^ year. The son, having married one of the sisters and 
 eventual heiresses of the last Gilbert of Clare, who died in 1314, 
 and having become Earl of Gloucester, wdll sufficiently account 
 for the presence of the Clare coat. 
 
 Tlie royal arms of England — the three lions on a red field — 
 of course have allusion to the sovereign; and the fleurs-de-lis 
 border to some of the lights may be well supposed to have 
 reference to the French ancestry of Queen Isabella. 
 
 On the whole, I tliink, there is no objection to assigning the 
 year 1320, or thereabouts, as the probable date of the glass in 
 the east window. 
 
 The glass in the side windows of the choir will, I fear, require 
 a somewhat more detailed description, on accouut of its mutilated 
 and confused condition. 
 
 It will be convenient to mention, first, what I conceive to be 
 the remains of the original glazing of these windows ; and to 
 beo-in with the second window from the east on the north side of 
 the choir. 
 
 It is evident, I think, that the glass in the tracery lights, and 
 in the pierced transom, as well as that composing tlie Martyrdom 
 of St. Sebastian — in the three upper lights — belongs to the 
 window ; but I do not think that any of the original glazing of 
 the three lower lights remains, except the canopy spires in the 
 cuspidated heads of the two outer lights. The occurrence of the 
 heraldic border of fleurs-de-lis and lions, in the tracery lights and 
 both tiers of lower lights, certainly affords a strong ground for 
 thinking that the glazing, which I have designated as original, 
 formed part of one and the same window. It is easy, I think, 
 to perceive what was the original design of the window when in 
 a perfect state. The topmost tracery light, now devoid of 
 painted glass, was no doubt ornamented in the same way as the 
 two others. Each of the lower liglits in both tiers contained a 
 canopy ; but whether the canopies in the lower tier of lights 
 covered single figures only, or one group of figures, like the 
 canopies in the upper tier of lights — as also w^hether, in either 
 tier, the pictures reached down to the bottom of the light, or 
 had some ornamental pattern beneath them — must remain 
 pretty much a matter of conjecture. The group alluded to, in 
 the upper tier of lights, will repay examination. The figure of 
 
BRISTOL, WELLS, GLOUCESTER, AND EXETER. 163 
 
 St. Sebastian, pierced with arrows, occupies the centre light. 
 An archer, shooting at him with a bow, is conspicuous in the 
 eastern light ; and the head of a corresponding archer exists in 
 the western light, but is so obscured with dirt as to be scarcely 
 visible. Immediately below the figure of St. Sebastian is repre- 
 sented a regal person lying asleep, wdth a dog having one foot 
 on his shoulder, and apparently licking his face with its tongue. 
 This painting does not seem to have any connexion with the 
 legend of St. Sebastian, and was probably brought into such 
 close proximity to the Martyrdom in the course of repairs. Can 
 it represent the "Story of the king who was rescued, by the 
 fidelity of his dogs, from a sedition plotted by his courtiers ; " to 
 which story allusion is made, by Mr. Hudson Turner, at p. 262 
 of his recently published History of Domestic Architecture ? 
 
 In the next window, the glass of the tracery lights is original; 
 and so, I think, are the canopy spires in the two easternmost of 
 the lights of the upper tier, and some, if not all, of the canopy 
 spires which fill the cuspidated heads of the lights of the lower 
 tier. The merchants' marks in the two quatrefoils, and the 
 little ornaments in the spandrels under the transom, are un- 
 doubtedly in their original position. Of course, nothing further 
 can be conjectured respecting the design of the window when 
 perfect, than that tlie lower lights contained figures and canopies, 
 with probably an heraldic panel beneath each canopy. It is 
 reasonable to suppose that the. donor of the window was a 
 merchant. 
 
 The remains of original glazing in the first window from the 
 east, on the south side, are even more scanty. None of it exists 
 above the transom ; but in the quatrefoils below the transom 
 are tw^o coats of arms, undoubtedly in their original situation, 
 which may be the means, at some future time, of throwing con- 
 siderable light on the question of date. One of the shields, that 
 in the easternmost quatrefoil, displays, on a white field, a yellow 
 chevron, on which three bucks' heads caboshed are depicted, in 
 outline ; and therefore are yellow also.^ This apparently false 
 heraldry is ascribable to the by no means uncommon practice, 
 especially of the more ancient glass-painters, whenever they 
 wished to save themselves trouble, of painting in simple outline 
 upon the field, or ordinary, any charge which could only be 
 properly represented by leading in a piece of glass of a different 
 colour. Had not the field of the coat been argent, I should have 
 
 It is engraved in Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' plate xciii,, fig. 7. 
 
 M 2 
 
3 64 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT 
 
 concluded tliat the chevron was properly coloured or ; but in the 
 present case the tincture, both of tlie chevron and its charges, 
 is equally left in doubt. I have hitherto been unable to ascer- 
 tain the ownership of this coat. Since writing these remarks, I 
 have been referred to a Devon family, of the name of " Syrming- 
 ton," or " Servington," whose coat — '•' ermine, on a chevron sable 
 (sometimes azure), three bucks' heads caboshed, or" — affords a 
 clue to the coat in question. The other shield displays, or, three 
 eagles sable — impaling, or rather, dimidiated with, the first- 
 named coat. It is possible that this is the coat of Eodney, the 
 glass-painter, for convenience sake having represented thepurple 
 eagles of that coat Avith enamel brown. I have met with the 
 bearing of Castile — argent, a lion rampant purpure — represented 
 by a lion painted black, with enamel brown, on a white piece of 
 glass. Whatever be the alliance thus indicated, it may, how- 
 ever, furnish a clue to the date and presentation of the window. 
 The remaining gla,ss belonging to the window is the canopy spires 
 which fill the cuspidated heads of three of the lower lights. 
 
 The next window retains none of its original glazing. 
 
 The interjDolated glass next demands our attention. The 
 most interesting portions of it are the figures of two knights — 
 one displaying on his surcoat and shield a white cross on a red 
 field ; the other a red cross on a white field. ^ The first-men- 
 tioned figure, though divided, and part placed in each of the 
 north windows, is, on the whole, in better preservation than the 
 other, the only remaining portion -of which, consisting of the legs 
 and some part of the body, is preserved in one of the south 
 windows — the first from the east. But as both figures have 
 evidently been painted from the same cartoon, the missing parts 
 of the one may readily be supplied from the other. 
 
 The figure in the north window, which alone I shall describe, 
 is armed cap-a-pie, with a visored basinet and camail, legs and 
 arms in plate, or rather cuir bouilli ; and the body clad in that 
 peculiar garment whicli a|)pears to form the connecting link 
 between the surcoat and the jupon, and is called a cyclas — 
 having a square piece cut out in front, whicli exposes to view 
 the mail and armour beneatli. A sliield suspended from the 
 neck by a strap, and a lance with a triangular pennon, on which, 
 as well as on the shield and cyclas, is represented the white cross 
 on the red ground, completes the knight's appointmeuts. The 
 
 1 See the engraving, in Lyson's 'Gloucestershire,' plate xciv. Some mistake 
 hafj been made in coloiirhi'j this plate. 
 
PLATE m 
 
 FROM E. WINDOW OF 
 CHANCEL , TROYLE CH . HANTS 
 
 Charles Wmston , del , Philip Delain otte Liti.c Vincent Brooks 
 
 N.WIN DOW, CHOIR, BRISTOL CATHEDRAL 
 
BRISTOL, WELLS, GLOUCESTEE, AND EXETER. 165 
 
 whole of the canopy, under which the figure stands, may be col- 
 lected from the four windows, amongst which its parts are distri- 
 buted. Tliere can be no doubt that, originally, a panel containing 
 a shield intervened between the base of the canopy and the sill 
 of the window. Such a panel, with the arms of one of the 
 branches of the house of Berkeley, and having a border attached 
 of the same pattern as that belonging to the knight's (canopy, 
 may be seen in the north window next the east. The fragments 
 of two other figures — one a Pope, the otlier a Saint — having 
 attached to their canopies a border of the same pattern as that 
 attached to the knight's, are scattered about three of the choir 
 windows. Thus, reckoning the knight, four subjects, evidently 
 belonging to one and the same window, remain. It would be 
 inconsistent witli what has been said respecting the remains of 
 original glazing in the two easternmost of the north and south 
 windows, to suppose that these four subjects belonged originally 
 to either of those windows. The only alternative is, to suppose 
 that they originally belonged to some other windows; as, for 
 instance, the second window from the east of the north aisle of 
 the choir, the four lower lights of which exactly correspond in 
 size and shape with the dimensions of the knight's canopy, and 
 of such a panel as I have suggested as having been originally 
 placed beneath it. 
 
 There are also, in the easternmost of the north windows of the 
 choir, the remains of a knight, bearing the arms of Berkeley of 
 Stratton depicted on his surcoat and square banner. This figure is 
 larger than any of the four figures already mentioned, and is not 
 at present connected with any canopy. Near it is another square 
 banner, displaying one quartering of the Despencer coat — gules, 
 a fret or; and also the remains of another knight. The arms 
 prove, I think, that the glass never belonged to either the 
 easternmost north or south window of the choir. It probably 
 was removed from a window of the nave. The arms of Mortimer,^ 
 and many other interesting fragments collected in one of the 
 north windows of the choir, seem in like manner to have been 
 removed from other windows. 
 
 With regard to the date of the glass originally belonging to 
 the side windows, I should not think that it differed from that 
 already assigned to the glass of the east window, were it not for 
 the heraldic borders of fleurs-de-lis and lions in the second win- 
 
 ^ These arms are engraved in Lyson's ' Gloucestershire,' in cue of the plates 
 already mentioned. 
 
16() ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT 
 
 dow from the east, on the north side of the choir. A border of 
 lions and fleurs-de-lis, though commoner in glass of Edward III.'s 
 time, in this instance may have reference to Edward II. and his 
 queen, Isabella of France. But, however this may be, there can 
 be very little difference between the date of this glass and that 
 of the east window. 
 
 With regard to the interpolated glass, I am inclined to think 
 that it also is of the same date, or nearly so, as the glass in the 
 east window. The border of yellow eagles displayed, on a green 
 ground, now in the first window from the east on the south side, 
 may certainly, from the agreement of its colouring with that of 
 the coat of Gaveston — who bore three or more yellow eagles, on 
 a green field — be supposed to allude to that favourite, and 
 therefore to be earlier than 1312 ; but for this supposition I 
 should not have considered it to be older than the rest of the 
 glass. With regard to the knights with the white and red 
 crosses — the opinion that they are impersonifications of the 
 orders of the Hospitallers and Templars, would require the date 
 of the glass to be put as early as 1307, when the Templars 
 began to be persecuted in England; or, at least, as early as 
 1313, when the order was suppressed by the Pope : but so early 
 a date can scarcely be reconciled with the use of the cyclas, and 
 other peculiarities in the costume of these figures ; and, judging 
 only from the internal evidence supplied by the glass itself, I 
 should not be more inclined to put these figures, than the eagle 
 border, earlier than 1320. The - costume of the figures w^ould 
 admit of a date as late as 1340.^ It is therefore possible that 
 these figures, like the fleurs-de-lis and lion border in the other 
 window, may be of the commencement of the reign of Edward III. ; 
 but it is impossible to be positive on such a point. 
 
 The rest of the glass in the Cathedral need not detain us long. 
 The oldest specimen undoubtedly is the small quantity of glass 
 remaining in the tracery lights of the east wdndow of the elder 
 Lady Chapel, and which is as early as the end of the reign of 
 Edward I. There are some Perpendicular fragments in their 
 original position, in the west and south windows of the transept, 
 the colouring of which is remarkably rich. The east windows 
 of the choir aisles are both of the same date. It would appear 
 from the arms in one of the windows, that they were the gift of 
 Dean Glemham, in the reign of Charles II. The dulness of 
 these windows, as compared with the older examples, is occa- 
 
 See as late an instance of the use of the cyclas, in Lyson's 'Berks,' p. 421. 
 
BRISTOL, WELLS, GLOUCESTER, AXD EXETER. 167 
 
 sioned by the mode of tlieir execution ; glass coloured with 
 enamels being used, in accordance with the practice of the day, 
 in preference to glass coloured in its manufacture. 
 
 mayor's chapel, BRISTOL. 
 
 The glass in the 3Iayor's Chapel aflbrds a means of contrastiug 
 the later styles of painted glass with the earlier styles in the 
 Cathedral. The greater part of it was, I believe, brought from 
 Mr. Beckford's house at Fonthill. Amongst other specimens of 
 cinque-cento work, I may mention an excellent ligare of St. 
 Barbara, in the east window ; and a companion figure, of 
 St. Catharine, of inferior merit. These, as well as most of the 
 specimens of cinque-cento, seem to be of Flemish workmanship. 
 The scourging of Christ, in one of the north windows, is remark- 
 able for the use made of '• sprinkled ruby " to represent His 
 lacerated body. In another of the side windows — the first from 
 the west — is some late French ornamental work, exiiibiting the 
 cyphers, mottoes, and emblems of Henry II. of France, and 
 Diana of Poictiers. Some of this glass is dated 151:3. 
 
 In the west window of the south aisle of the chapel are some 
 very good little German glass-paintings ; one of which is dated 
 1537. These works, which, of course, were originally intended 
 for close inspection, show that it is possible to combine a very 
 high degree of finish with a full display of the brilKant and 
 sparkling qualities of a glass-painting — a fact which modern 
 glass-painters are too apt to overlook. 
 
 WELLS CATHEDRAL. 
 
 The windows of this edifice, eastward of the central tower, 
 retain a large proportion of their original glazing. And the 
 glass is well worthy of examination, on account of its perfect 
 state, and the general goodness of its execution. Unfortunately 
 there is no other heraldry to guide us, as to its date, except the 
 borders of lions and fleurs-de-lis, or of lions, or fleurs-de-lis only, 
 which occur in most of the windows. 
 
 An inscrij^tion in one of the windows of the Lady Chapel, 
 which might have decided the question, has unluckily been 
 obliterated in its most important part. The words *•' Ista capella 
 const ntcta est " are all that now remain. (It occurs in the first 
 window from the east, on the south side of the Lady Chapel.) 
 We are therefore left to infer the probable date of the glass from 
 the internal evidence derivable from the style of the painting, 
 
168 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT 
 
 the costumes, and texture of the materiaL And the conclusion 
 that I have arrived at from these data is, that the Decorated 
 glass at Wells is, as nearly as possible, contemporary with that 
 of Bristol. Making allowance for a few years' difference in date 
 between the various specimens at Wells, I think we may assign 
 1320, or tliereabouts, as the date of the glazing. 
 
 The east window of the Lady Chapel has been restored — I 
 wish I could add as conscientiously as the east window of Bristol 
 has been ; for the artist here has thought proper permanently to 
 obscure the remains of the old glass, as well as the modern glass 
 used in the restoration — a device which, whilst it fails to render 
 the modern glass undistinguishable from the old, greatly impairs 
 the general effect of the window by depriving it of brilliancy. 
 However, as there can be no doubt that the old design has been 
 adhered to in the restoration, the window in its present state 
 shows at a glance, what the side windows show only on careful 
 examination — that the lower lights of these windows were 
 filled with two tiers of figures and canopies. The tracery lights 
 of the east window are filled with angels bearing the instruments 
 of the Passion. The topmost tracery light of three of the side 
 apsidal windows contains the emblem of one of the Evangelists, 
 the fourth emblem has evidently been lost : and the other lights 
 of the window, on the north side next the east, contain heads of 
 Patriarchs ; and those of the opposite window the heads of eccle- 
 siastical Saints. Some of these heads are very favourable speci- 
 mens of the skill of the glass-painters of the period, and the idea 
 of filling these small openings with busts, instead of entire 
 figm-es, was happy. The same mode of filling the tracery 
 lights is adopted in some of the other windows in the immediate 
 vicinity of the Lady Chapel, which retain their original glazing. 
 Amongst the busts are the heads of sainted Popes and Bishops, 
 the names being written on labels behind. 
 
 The east window of the choir is of singular design. The lower 
 lights are filled with a Stem of Jesse, terminating, as at Bristol, 
 with our Saviour on the Cross ; and the tracery lights with 
 a representation of the Day of Judgment. Magnificent as is its 
 colouring, the general effect of the window, owing to the too 
 crowded character of the composition, is inferior to that of the 
 east window of Bristol. It is impossible to distinguish the small 
 figures in the Judgment, clearly, from the floor of the choir; and 
 the insertion of canopies over the figures in the Jesse tends to 
 confuse the design. 
 
 The clearstory windows, on each side of the choir, had origi- 
 
BRISTOL, WELLS, GLOUCESTER, AXD EXETER. 169 
 
 nally a figure and oanopy in each of their lower lights. One of 
 the figures, in the north window next the east, represents St. 
 Georo-e, clad in a surcoat which reaches to the knee. He wears 
 a helmet, avant and rerebras, shin pieces and soUerets pf plate, 
 or rather cuir bouilli, the rest of his person is defended witli 
 mail, on his shoulders are aiglettes. The costume of this figure 
 appears to harmonise with the date assigned to the glass. In 
 the tracery lights of this window is a continuation of the Judg- 
 ment in the east window. 
 
 The remains of glass in the Chapter House are but trifling. 
 They seem, I think, to be of somewhat earKer date than the rest, 
 but still are of the time of Edward II. 
 
 There are some early Perpendicular fragments in the windows 
 of the nave and transept. Some of the figures have the visored 
 basinet and camail, the jupou, and heavy sword belt. 
 
 In the west window of the nave is some cinque-cento glass, 
 the more valuable as it happens to be a dated example. A 
 Gascon inscription, as I believe, sets forth the year of grace 
 1507. 
 
 GLOUCESTEE CATHEDEAL. 
 
 The great attraction of Gloucester Cathedral is its magni- 
 ficent east window, in many respects the finest in England. 
 Erom the abundance of heraldry in the lower part of this 
 window, I have little doubt that its date could be ascertained 
 with considerable exactness; but the task of making out the 
 charges on the shields has, owing to the dirty state of the glass, 
 hitherto proved beyond my power. Though a decided enemy 
 to Eestorations, which in nine times out of ten would be more 
 truly called Destructions, I confess I have often wished that this 
 window had been placed in the hands of that real restorer, to 
 whose tenderness and care the present satisfactory condition of 
 the east window of Bristol is due.^ 
 
 Under these circumstances, I can only hazard a conjecture 
 that the probable date of the glass is very early in the second 
 half of the fourteenth century. It is in all respects thorouglily 
 Decorated in character, though the architecture of the window 
 possesses Perpendicular features principally. But, as a general 
 rule, it is true, that a change in the style of architecture has 
 always preceded, by some years, the corresponding change in 
 the style of painted glass. 
 
 As to its subsequent restoration and date,, see Memoir XIV. 
 
170 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT 
 
 The glazing of tlie window is in its original position, and 
 there is no ground for supposing that the somewhat sudden 
 termination of the colouring tow^ards the top of the window is 
 accidental. On the contrary, it is evident that the arrangement 
 of the glass in the upper part of the window is according to the 
 original design. 
 
 The two first tiers of lights from the ground are filled with 
 coloured borders and ornamented white quarries, a shield of 
 arms in a panel is inserted in each light, and a small ornamented 
 roundel placed at some distance beneath it. The three next 
 tiers of lights throughout the window are filled with figures and 
 canopies, and, in the central part of the windoAv, another tier 
 likewise ; the spires of this row of canopies running into the tier 
 of lights above. This arrangement, as might be expected, 
 imparts a grand pyramidical character to the whole design. All 
 the tracery lights of the window are filled with ornamented white 
 quarries, and enriched with small roundels of ornament inserted 
 here and there. 
 
 The colouring of the lower lights — containing figures and 
 canopies — is arranged on a principle not uncommon in Early 
 Perpendicular glass. The figures are almost entirely white, 
 having yellow stained hair, and borders to their robes : the 
 architectural work of the canopies is wholly composed of white 
 and yellow stained glass. The positive colouring is confined to 
 the spire backgrounds of the canopies, and the tapestry which 
 lines the interior of the niche. And it is carried in uniform 
 streaks, or columns, down the window. Thus, the spire grounds 
 and tapestries of the central column — which is two lights broad, 
 all the other columns being only of the width of one light — are 
 coloured red ; those of the next column, on each side the centre 
 one, are coloured blue ; those of the next red — and so on. The 
 large proportion of white used in the most coloured parts prevents 
 any violent transition, from the figure and canopy part, to the 
 quarry part of the window. 
 
 The lull effect of the Gloucester window, no doubt, depends 
 not only on the simplicity of the composition, the largeness of 
 its parts, and the breadth of its colouring, but also on the excel- 
 lence of the material of which the window is composed. Still, I 
 know no window so likely as this to improve by long contempla- 
 tion the taste of modern glass-painters, and their patrons. 
 
 The side windows of the choir clearstory retain enough of 
 their original glazing — which is precisely of the same date as 
 that of the east window^ — to enable us to perceive that their 
 
BRISTOL, WELLS, GLOUCESTER, AND EXETER. 171 
 
 lower tier of lights was filled with figures and canopies, and their 
 upper tier and tracery lights with borders and quarry patterns, 
 having small roundels of ornament inserted of the same cha- 
 racter as the pattern work in the east window. A corroborative 
 proof, if any were necessary, of the originality of the arrange- 
 ment of the glass in the upper part of the east window, with 
 which the aiTangement of the glass in the side windows so per- 
 fectly harmonises. 
 
 There are very interesting remains of Early Perpendicular 
 and Decorated glass in other windows of Gloucester Cathedral, 
 to which I cannot further advert for want of time. 
 
 The east window of the Lady Chapel, which is in very fair 
 preservation, is of the last half of the lifteenth century. 
 
 EXETER CATHEDEAL. 
 
 The forecroins: list of fourteenth-centurv o-lass would not be 
 complete without some notice of the remains in Exeter Cathedral. 
 But this will not detain us long. Very little of the glass is in its 
 original position. I have no doubt, judging from its style, the 
 absence of the yellow stain, &:c., that the greater portion is of 
 the latter part of the reign of Edward I.; and the later glass 
 seems early in the reign of Edward 11. Britton, in his History 
 of the Cathedral, mentions that about 500 feet of glass was 
 bought in 1303-1 ; and that a large quantity was purchased in 
 1317, at Bouen. It is possible that some of this may be extant. 
 I was much struck with the purity and hardness of the white 
 glass composing even the earlier patterns ; a feature which may 
 likewise be remarked in the remains of Early Decorated glass at 
 Westminster Abbey, and in 3Ierton Chapel, Oxford. It is 
 possible that this glass was obtained from a common source. 
 
 The most perfect window is the fourth fi'om the east, on the 
 north side of the choir clearstory. There is a great variety of 
 very beautiful patterns, and many details of pecidiar interest, in 
 most of the choir windows, and the windows of the chapels about 
 the choir. Several of these patterns have been so tastily touched 
 up with colour in the last century — by Peckitt, I presume — as 
 to be at first sight not a little puzzling. On the whole, the 
 Exeter glass will be foimd to repay a visit. 
 
 The modern glass in the west window, and the ruby with which 
 the old patterns have been retouched, is interesting ; as being, 
 perhaps, some of the latest ruby that was manufactured in 
 England, before M. Bontemps revived the art. Some of the 
 
172 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT 
 
 bull's eyes of this ruby are inserted in the east window of the 
 choir. The date of the west window, I have been informed, is 
 1766. 
 
 Such is the account I have attempted to give of these ancient 
 relics. I have purposely omitted many curious details, from a 
 fear of trespassing upon your time more unwarrantably than I 
 have done already. Yet, imperfect as this sketch necessarily is, 
 it will not be useless if it should incite but one person to a real 
 study of the subject of painted glass. It is only by repeatedly 
 looking at ancient glass that we learn to appreciate its pecu- 
 liarities. It is by slow degrees that the eye becomes accustomed 
 to its tone ; still more slowly, may I add, is the mind convinced 
 that all styles of painted glass have their excellences and their 
 defects. In approaching a subject on which there can be no 
 appeal to any generally recognised standard, we cannot be too 
 much on our guard against being deceived by our prejudices. 
 This remark is peculiarly applicable to the study of glass- 
 painting ; because it has, unfortunately, become associated w^ith 
 opinions with which it has only an accidental connexion. Like 
 architecture, painted glass has been, I know not why, regarded 
 as a subject of almost purely ecclesiastical interest, and hence 
 has been exposed to much misapplied criticism ; a great deal of 
 which has reference not exclusively to glass-painting as such, 
 nor to any mode of representation, and is founded rather on 
 theological than artistic considerations. 
 
 Certain styles of painted glass, and of architecture^ moreover^ 
 have been regarded as objectionable, or made the theme of 
 enthusiastic admiration ; not so much on account of their intrinsic 
 defects or excellences, as from a dislike or predilection for certain 
 views which are thought to be necessarily associated with such 
 styles. For instance, we all know that by a certain class of 
 writers, Palladian architecture, although so widely differing from 
 the classical styles, and although it has been actually more uni- 
 versally employed for ecclesiastical purposes than the Gothic, is 
 branded as " Pagan," and unholy ; wdiilst Gothic architecture 
 alone rejoices in the appellation of Christian architecture, and 
 certain symbols of acknowledged Pagan origin, such as the 
 crescent of the Virgin, by being associated with it, are, as we 
 are told, " hallowed." In like manner, the cinque-cento style of 
 painted glass is held up to scorn and reprobation as a " Paganism ; " 
 whilst that of the thirteenth century, " the age of faith," is con- 
 sidered to be truly Christian. It is not for me to inquire whether 
 such epithets are properly or improperly applied, or whether 
 
BRISTOL, WELLS, GLOUCESTEE, AND EXETER. 173 
 
 Christianity lias deteriorated ever since tlie time when the spirit 
 of ecclesiastical domination was curbed ; but that the continued 
 use of these, as well as of other nicknames, is intended to create 
 a prejudice, and does, in fact, not unfrequentlv produce this 
 result with unreflecting persons, is indisputable. The student of 
 glass-painting must, however, be superior to such influences. He 
 will find that all styles of ancient glass are equally worthy his 
 attention ; and, in particular, will not fail to perceive that, on 
 comparing one with another, inferiority on one point is not 
 unfrequently compensated by, if not the cause of, superiority on 
 another ; or, to be struck with the general consistency of conven- 
 tion practised in each style. For instance, the intense and 
 sparkling colouring common to glass-paintings of the fourteenth 
 centurv, is sought for in vain in a cinque-cento glass-painting ; 
 and the delicate execution of the cinque-cento is equally wanting 
 in the earlier work ; yet it is unquestionable that the delicate 
 shading employed by the cinque-cento artists would, in great 
 measure, be lost in the powerful colouring of a glass-painting of 
 the fourteenth century ; and it is certain that nothing would be 
 more miserable in effect, than a work executed in the simple 
 manner of the fourteenth century, upon the comparatively poor 
 material of the sixteenth.^ 
 
 I am much mistaken if the lesson to be learnt from an unpre- 
 judiced examination of all styles of painted glass, will not tend 
 to a belief that the modern system of copying or closely imi- 
 tating old work is erroneous ; not only on artistic principles, but 
 considered as a means of merely reproducing their effect. 
 
 I am aware that certain writers, more distinguished, perhaps, 
 for the flippancy of their remarks than the accuracy of their 
 statements, deny the existence of any perceptible difference 
 between the glass, for instance, of the fourteenth century and 
 that used in imitation of it. But, as the existence of such 
 difference is capable of easy proof, and as tliese self-styled 
 "leaders of the movement" are, notwithstanding their preten- 
 sions, only following the lead of public opinion, I shall expect to 
 find them asserting their belief in its existence, as soon as that 
 belief becomes popular ; as it must, if such examination of old 
 glass as I have recommended be generally made. Believing, as 
 I do, that although glass might easily be manufactured more 
 harmonious in its tone than that now used, vet, that it will ever 
 
 1 Messrs. Pugin and Hardmau's imitatious of thirteenth and fourteenth centuiy 
 glass most full}' prove the correctness of the opinion stated u\ the text. 
 
174 ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT BRISTOL, ETC. 
 
 be a matter of extreme difficulty to reproduce the diaphanous, 
 rich, or pearl-like material of the fourteenth and previous cen- 
 turies : I confess I see no reason for abandoning or qualifying 
 any of the views I have long since expressed, relating to the 
 invention of a nineteenth century style of glass-painting, suffi- 
 ciently plastic to mould itself into conformity with the character 
 of edifices of different dates : ^ and, in the formation of which, 
 ideas, especially as regards arrangement of colour, should be 
 freely borrowed from those later styles in which a material was 
 employed not dissimilar in character from that which can now, 
 or will, in all likelihood, be obtained. Even if the time per- 
 mitted, it would be premature, if not unnecessary, to enter into 
 the details of the scheme more fully than I have done already on 
 various occasions ; since I am persuaded that, if the necessity of 
 forming a new style is conceded, the mode of carrying it into 
 effect will soon suggest itself. The opinion that a new style is 
 necessary, to meet technical difficulties and the requirements of 
 the age, is all that I seek to establish. ^J'he only indulgence I 
 crave is, that the subject may be tJiorovghly investigated before 
 that opinion is condemned. 
 
 * Since the above remarks were in Still the necessity for a nineteenth- 
 type, some experiments, the results of century style continues ; although the 
 which I staled in a paper read before discoveries alluded to will involve a 
 the Royal Institute of British Arcl)i- modification of some of my previously 
 tects, 14th June, 1852, have shown the expressed views as to what that style 
 possibility of making white and coloured should be. (The memoir referred to is 
 glass equal in tone, and true to that of that which follows.) 
 the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 
 
PLATt V 
 
 MERTON COL 
 
 CHAPLL OXFORD 
 
 Charles WiTLstxn,del. 
 
 PhJip Deiaiuolte.Litho 
 
 LINCOLN CATHEDRAL 
 
 Vincent Brooks 
 
VII. 
 
 ON A KEVIVED MANUFACTUKE OF COLOURED 
 GLASS USED IN ANCIENT WINDOWS. 
 
 Read at the Ordinary Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
 June Uth, 1852. 
 
 HE point to which I have to direct your atten- 
 tion is, " a revived manufacture of glass used in 
 ancient windows ; " but, in order that the im- 
 portance of the subject may not be underrated, 
 I wish to make some remarks, in the first place, 
 on the harmony observable between the design 
 and execution of glass-paintings and the quality 
 of the material of whicli they are composed — a 
 harmony which, though more remarkable at some periods than 
 at others, may yet be observed, in a greater or less degree, in 
 all works having any pretension to originality. It is only when 
 the perception of the artist has become blunted, and his inven- 
 tion paralysed by a habit of servile, unreflecting imitation, that 
 all trace of tlie harmony is lost. I cannot better illustrate my 
 meaning than by contrasting the glass-paintings of the middle 
 of the sixteenth century with those of the twelfth and thir- 
 teenth. 
 
 At this early period, when the richest, the most beautiful, and 
 the deepest colouring in glass that we are acquainted ^vith was 
 employed, we always find that the picture was both designed 
 and executed in the simplest manner. There are no compli- 
 cated groups, no atmospheric effects ; hardly any effect of 
 light and shade, and no high finish. If a group is repre- 
 sented, the figures all appear to be in the same plane, and to be 
 cut out by a stiff background of deep blue or red. A land- 
 scape is rarely attempted ; when this is the case, it is sym- 
 bolised, rather than represented, by trees, buildings, or other 
 accessories, of most mediaeval cut and conventional character, 
 which always appear, by the positiveness of their colouring, to 
 be in the same plane as the figures, and, like them, are cut out 
 
376 ON A REVIVED MANUFACTURE OF 
 
 by the aforesaid stiff background. The whole expression of the 
 drawing is conveyed by means of strong black outlines, the effect 
 of which is usually heightened by a simple wash of shadow in 
 half-tint, the edges of which are left hard. In short, the artists 
 of this early time seem to have aimed at producing little less 
 than a rich mosaic, of the most vivid and harmonious hues. 
 
 I say they seem to have done so, for I am morally certain that 
 they were really as ambitious of pictorial effect as any of their 
 successors, and that their not having achieved it resulted rather 
 from circumstances and want of skill, than from any lack of 
 intention. Had these men really adopted a flat style, on prin- 
 ciple, they could hardly have failed to avoid those inconsistencies 
 which are so obvious in their works, such as representing a 
 landscape at all under such conditions ; shading the figure, and 
 giving it a greater relief than the canopy under which it is sup- 
 posed to be placed; and regulating the depth of the shading 
 rather by the size of the figure, than the intended position of 
 the painting in the church. 
 
 Had they acted on a well understood principle, we might have 
 expected to find some attempt made to lessen, if not obviate, 
 the indistinctness resulting from a flat treatment, by means of a 
 proper arrangement of the colouring ; but the instances where 
 the entire colouring of a group is strongly contrasted with the 
 hue of the background, are so rare as to justify the supposition 
 that they were accidental. I am, I confess, led by these, and 
 similar considerations, irresistibly, to the conclusion that the 
 glass-painters of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, though 
 great colourists, were not, in other respects, great artists ; and, 
 that whatever we find good in their works, is the rich legacy of 
 antiquity : that, as we undoubtedly owe to Pagan times the art 
 of imparting these magnificent colours to glass,^ so do we owe to 
 the influence of Pagan art that style of low relief which, cor- 
 rupted by the Byzantines, and misunderstood in "y'' ages of 
 feythe," is, nevertheless, so far as it is developed in the windows 
 of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, so truly admirable. 
 
 ^ The truth of this will sufficiently resemblauce which the most superficial 
 
 appear on comparing the coloured glass observer must recognise of the twelfth 
 
 of the twefth century with the sped- and early thirteenth century draperies 
 
 mens of Roman and Greek glass in the and figures to those of the Greek school 
 
 British Museum. So complete an iden- of art, raises a reasonable inference that 
 
 tity of colour argues an identity of the glass-painters of those times, though, 
 
 manvifacture, which manufacture there in all probability, natives of the country 
 
 is good ground for believing was handed in which they practised, derived their 
 
 down from Pagan times. The strong art from the Byzantines. 
 
COLOURED GLASS USED IX AXCIEXT ^YIXDO^VS. 177 
 
 because so excellently adapted to the stiff and intense colours 
 of the period — colours so intense and unvarying in depth as 
 to preclude the possibility of their being made subservient to 
 those pictorial effects ^yhich are indispensable to the satisfactory 
 representation of a subject whose composition would rank above 
 that of a bas-relief. 
 
 The contrast afforded by turning to a glass-paintmg of the 
 middle of the sixteenth century is very striking. We no longer 
 behold a stiff mosaic depending for success almost exclusively on 
 the richness of its colomiug, but, on the contrary, a picture, 
 brilliant, it is true, but resting its claims quite as much on its 
 composition and general treatment as on the vivacity of its 
 hues. Here complicated foreground groups, as well as im- 
 portant architectural accessories, are introduced ; they are deli- 
 neated correctly, and highly finished. The relative distances of 
 the various objects are preserved by means of light and shade ; 
 and the landscape background, monotonous as it may appear 
 in comparison with that of an oil or fresco painting, recedes and 
 disengages itself from the figures and architecture, imparting to 
 the picture an effect of atmosphere. 
 
 The glass of which this picture is composed will be found, on 
 examination, to differ widely from that used in the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries. In general it is thinner in substance ; it is 
 always weaker in tint ; and on that account, if regarded simply 
 as a vehicle for colour, would be far inferior to the elder mate- 
 rial. Yet for the purpose to which it is applied it could not be 
 more suitable. Its pellucidness and lightness of tint are admir- 
 ably calculated to display the high finish of the painting, to 
 favour atmospheric effect, and vivid contrasts of light and 
 shade. Xor does the employment of a material comparatively 
 so flimsy and weak impart a corresponding flimsiness or weak- 
 ness to the picture. A good specimen of cinque-cento work will 
 be found as imposing in effect as a window of the twelfth or 
 thirteenth century. Let any one endeavour to recall to mind 
 the glass at Chartres, and that filling the four windows of the 
 chapel of the Mnaculous Sacrament in Brussels Cathedral. I 
 am sui-e he will feel an impression that he has seen something 
 at both places equally striking, sometliing equally removed fi'om 
 flimsiness or poverty. The paradox is easily explained Avhen 
 we consider that in the mosaics of the twelfth and thirteenth 
 centuries the effect of the glass is but little aided by contrast of 
 colour or by shading; whereas in the pictures of the cinque- 
 cento period, not only is the colouring arranged in broader 
 
178 ON A REVIVED MANUFACTUEE OF 
 
 masses, whicli is of itself a great assistance to a poor material, 
 but tlie strongest contrasts of colour and of light and shade are 
 employed. 
 
 I have now compared the best exponent I have been able to 
 find of a flat style of glass-painting with what I believe to be a 
 perfect exponent of the rotund or pictorial style of glass-painting, 
 and I have endeavoured to point out that in each specimen the 
 quality of the glass, and mode of painting it, are alike different ; 
 and further, that each kind of glass, and eacli mode of using it, 
 are severally calculated to act and react upon one another, so as 
 to set botli off to the greatest advantage. 
 
 It will be useful to pursue the subject further, and show that 
 during the whole interval which elapsed between the abandon- 
 ment of the flat or mosaic style, at the end of the thirteenth or 
 middle of the fourteenth century, and the adoption of the rotund 
 or pictorial style, which it took two centuries to perfect in the 
 cinque-cento, a certain harmony existed between the quality of 
 the material and the mode of working it. It would be rather a 
 matter of curiosity than of practical advantage to speculate on 
 the causes which led to these changes in the quality of the 
 material and the mode of working it. If I might hazard a con- 
 jecture, I should be inclined to say that it was a change in the 
 manufacture which induced, or necessitated, a change in the 
 painting, and not the reverse ; because we know that from 
 Pliny's time, downwards, the effort has always been to improve 
 on the manufacture of glass, that' is, to render the material more 
 pure and pellucid, and better fitted for domestic purposes, with- 
 out reference to its employment in painted windows. But, how- 
 ever this may be, each change in the manufacture, and each 
 change in the mode of painting, were, in general, contempo- 
 raneous. 
 
 There was but little change in the quality of the glass between 
 the end of the thirteenth century and the middle of the four- 
 teenth, if, perhaps, w^e except the deterioration of some of the 
 colours; the deep blue appears to have lost its sapphire-like 
 hue with the decline of Byzantine influences, soon after the 
 middle of the thirteenth century. And, during the same 
 period, the principles of the flat style were subjected to scarcely 
 any greater violation than they had already, if not always, sus- 
 tained. But in the second half of the fourteenth century, and, 
 as it would appear, in this country at least, about 1380, an im- 
 portant change in the manufacture of the material took place. 
 Tlie white glass became purer, and all the coloured glass lighter 
 
COLOUEED GLASS USED IX AXCIEXT WIXDOWS. 179 
 
 in tint. Simultaneously a not less important change in the mode 
 of painting was eftected. It is true that the colouring had 
 become broader and less mosaic, and the designs somewhat 
 more pictorial, previously to the cliange in the material in 
 1380 ; and this is particularly remarkable in the glass-paintings 
 of Germany, in which country I am strongly inclined to think 
 that the alteration in the glass manufacture originated. But 
 the change to y\hich I would now particularly advert is in the 
 execution of the painting. 
 
 Wykeham's glass at New College Chapel, Oxford, which is 
 one of the earliest specimens, may be referred to in illustration 
 of it. The outhnes became thinner, the shadows broader and 
 softer, the painting altogether higher wrought and finished, and 
 the treatment generally more pictorial. By the end of the 
 fom-teenth century the new style of execution was established, 
 as we see it in the east window of York ]\Iinster. But, though 
 rotund and pictorial in principle, it was not rotund or pictorial 
 in effect till the end of the ih-st quarter of the sixteenth cen- 
 tury, w^hen the bolder practice of the cinque-cento artists brought 
 it out in all its ^-igour. Still, though we must regard the works 
 of this long intermediate period as inferior alike to the painted 
 glass of the thirteenth century and the cinque-cento time, liaving 
 neither the depth of colour of the one nor the pictorial power of 
 the other, it is impossible to examine them without perceiving 
 that their authors must have felt that tlie more delicate material 
 with which they were furnished in^-ited, if not demanded, a more 
 delicate mode of execution. 
 
 Again, we may trace in all \\ orks executed since the middle of 
 the sixteenth centmy doNvn to the present time, except, indeed, 
 the recent imitations of media3val glass-paintings, a certain 
 degTee of harmony between the quality of the material and the 
 mode of working it. I do not intend to enter upon the compa- 
 rative merits of the mode of execution adopted by the cinque- 
 cento artists, Avho used an enamel colour only for the purposes 
 of shadiQg, and of the mode of execution adopted subsequently, 
 according to which enamel colours were used more or less in 
 substitution of glass coloured ui its manufacture, though I admit 
 I entertain a strong opinion in favour of the former, because I 
 know that the question is extensive enough, if gone into, to form 
 the subject of a separate inquiry. But, apart from this con- 
 sideration, we see in all the works of the A'an Linges, the Prices, 
 the Jervaises, and, lastly, in the modern 31unich glass, a very 
 delicate aud finished stvle of painting, combined with the use of 
 
 n2 
 
180 ON A REVIVED MANUFACTURE OF 
 
 a material so delicate and pellucid as to appear extremely flimsy, 
 were its tliinness not disguised by tlie mode of painting it. In 
 all glass-paintings, therefore, of whatever period, with the single 
 exception I have named, we find the execution and design of 
 the painting vaiy with the quality of the glass, being simple 
 when the glass was rich in colour, and not over transparent ; and 
 proportionately more and more delicate and comphcated as the 
 glass became weaker in colour, more pellucid, and more thin in 
 effect. And if any proof were wanting, either that these corre- 
 sponding changes were intentional, or dictated by good taste 
 and sound sense, it is amply afforded us by the modern copies of 
 mediaeval glass, and even by the devices resorted to in order to 
 insure as much as possible the fidelity of the imitation ; and, I 
 am sorry to add, the enormous mendacity not unfrequently 
 relied upon in support of a bad case. 
 
 The works to which I allude are copies of glass-paintings of the 
 twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. Some 
 persons roundly assert that there exists a positive identity of 
 effect between these copies and the originals; others seek to 
 excuse any apparent difference by the remark that age alone is 
 wanting to complete the identity. In dealing with these asser- 
 tions I shall assume the possibility of making exact copies of the 
 design and manipulation of ancient glass-paintings, for, though I 
 have never met with an instance of such exactness in English 
 work, I certainly have met with it repeatedly in French. I shall 
 therefore found whatever I have to urge in disproof of this alleged 
 identity, or would-be identity, upon an examination of the nature 
 and quality of the material of which these copies are composed. 
 
 I have discovered a simple mode of testing whether, on the 
 one hand, glass is sufficiently opaque, so as not to appear flimsy 
 or watery when put up in a window unassisted by shading, 
 according to the practice of the flat style of glass-painting ; on 
 the other, Avhether it is sufficiently clear to produce as brilliant 
 an effect as the old does. It is this : if the glass, held at arm's- 
 length from the eye, and at the distance of more than a yard 
 from an object, does not permit of that object being distinctly 
 seen through it, the glass will be sufficiently opaque ; and if, 
 when held at the same distance from the eye, and at the distance 
 of not more than a yard from the object, it permits of the latter 
 being distinctly seen through the glass, it will be sufficiently 
 <dear and transparent. I have found this to be the case with a 
 great many pieces of glass of the twelfth, thirteenth, and four- 
 teenth centuries, which had been rendered clear by polishing the 
 
COLOURED GLASS USED IN ANCIENT WINDOWS. 181 
 
 surface, or which were ah-eacly quite clear ; for it is a ^reat 
 mistake to suppose that all old glass has been rendered dull cu 
 the surface by exposure to the atmos|)here. I have seen a great 
 deal of glass of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that is as 
 clear now as when it was first made, its surface not having been 
 corroded in the least. But the glass of which these imitative 
 works are made is either smooth on the surface, and so pellucid 
 and watery as, when held at arm's-length, to permit of any 
 object being perfectly seen through it w^hich is at the distance of 
 100, or even 1000 yards, or more ; or else is artificially rough- 
 ened on the surface — a practice which reduces the condition of 
 the glass nearly to that of ground-glass — for, when held at arm's 
 length, it will not permit of any object being seen distinctly 
 through it which is distant more than an inch from the glass. 
 
 The practice, not unfrequently resorted to by the imitators of 
 old glass, of antiquating smooth-surfaced glass, that is, dulling 
 it with the enamel colour used for painting the outlines, renders 
 it, when held at arm's-length, nearly, if not quite, as opaque as 
 rough-surfaced glass ; indeed, almost the only perceptible dif- 
 ference in this respect between rough-surfaced glass and smooth- 
 surfaced glass that has been antiquated is, that the former is 
 free from the tint necessarily imparted to the latter by the 
 enamel colour with which it is antiquated. Thus we find that 
 imitations of glass of the twelfth, thirteenth, or fourteenth cen- 
 tury, if executed in smooth-surfaced glass that has not been 
 antiquated, are poor and watery in comparison with original 
 work of that period ; and that, if executed in glass that has been 
 antiquated, or in rough-surfaced glass, they are much too opaque. 
 In the one case, to speak popularly, the vision passes too unin- 
 terruptedly through the glass ; in the other, it is stopped at the 
 surface of the glass, instead of passing about a yard through it, 
 as in the case of ancient work. 
 
 I might show the non-identity of modern glass with ancient, 
 even by a reference to the difference of its colouring ; the old 
 being invariably harmonious and rich, the modern almost as 
 invariably raw, crude, and poor in tone, a circumstance arising 
 partly from the use of colouring materials different from those 
 formerly employed, partly from a difference in the make of the 
 glass. But I am content to leave the case as it stands. I can- 
 not, however, forbear the remark that it is most amusing to find 
 many earnest admirers of mediaeval imitations, who, though 
 apparently ignorant of the practice ol roughing the surface of 
 glass, are aware of the pernicious effect of " smudging," or 
 
182 ON A EEVIVED MANUFACTURE OF 
 
 " antiquating," that which is smoothly surfaced, attributing to 
 windows on which neither of these practices has been employed 
 the effect of ancient ones, because, as they assert, "the glass 
 then remains clear and pure as in ancient times." Was there 
 ever so entire a misconception ? Is flimsiness or wateriness a 
 characteristic of ancient glass ? Do we ever find the glass even 
 of the sixteenth century as flimsy and watery as that used in 
 the works to which they allude as exact imitations of glass- 
 paintings of the thirteenth ? Of course we do not. I say of 
 course, because recent analyses have discovered the presence 
 of at least one constituent of old glass which does not exist in 
 the modern, and which, on being purposely introduced, produces 
 that selfsame effect of solidity and richness which we perceive 
 and admire in the old. 
 
 It is now time to advert to the revived manufacture of glass, 
 which constitutes the text of this paper ; and in doing so I must 
 disclaim any merit that may attach to the discovery beyond 
 having started the inquiry which led to it, and sometimes 
 having given an opinion on the quality of the colours produced. 
 The merit of the discovery is to be ascribed to the chemical 
 science of my friend Mr. Medlock, of the Koyal College of 
 Chemistry, and the practical skill of Mr. Edward Green, of 
 Messrs. Powell's glass-works in Wbitefriars. 
 
 I v/as anxious in the autumn of 1849 to procure some blue 
 glass like that of the twelfth century ; that is to say, not a raw 
 positive blue, such as we see in modern windows, but a soft, 
 bright, intense blue, or rather a sort of neutralized purple. And 
 for this purpose I submitted some twelfth century bine glass to 
 Mr. Medlock for analysis. He completed his analysis in Easter- 
 week, 1850, and thereby determined that the colouring matter 
 was cobalt, thus putting an end to many ingenious speculations 
 that had been previously formed on the subject, some, I am 
 afraid, without much reflection. The lapis lazuli theory, which 
 has been embraced by Mr. Hendrie in his translation of 
 ' Theophilus,' and Mrs. Merrifield, in her ' Ancient Practice of 
 Painting,' is, indeed, opposed to the testimony of Dr. Merret in 
 the seventeenth century, in a note by him on the treatise of 
 Neri, where he declares that he had ascertained by experiment 
 the impossibility of colouring glass blue with lapis lazuli, about 
 which there can be no doubt. Mr. Medlock intends, I know, to 
 prosecute his inquiries on the subject of blue glass, and to 
 analyse various specimens from the twelfth to the sixteenth 
 century, when wo know that cobalt was employed, so as to form 
 
COLOURED GLASS USED IN ANCIENT WINDOWS. 183 
 
 a series which, when connected witli the analyses of Roman and 
 Greek glass made by Sir Henry de la Beche and others, will 
 form a most valuable chain in the history of the manufacture. 
 It would therefore be unbecoming in me to anticipate Mr. 
 IMedlock's Memoir by giving a more detailed statement of this 
 analysis; I may, however, add, that the discovery of the true 
 colouring matter was but one of the beneficial results of this 
 analysis ; for in working it out practically, in which due atten- 
 tion was paid to the ancient receipts, the ancient art of making 
 white and coloured glass was, in effect, revived. I say revived, 
 for, between the glass that has been already made, and the old, 
 I can discover no perceptible difference, though I have tested it 
 in every way I can conceive, short of actually having a window 
 made of it. I had hoped that it would have been subjected to 
 this test ere now, but it will, at all events, be very shortly sub- 
 mitted to it ; and as the blue in question, and, indeed, the rest 
 of the new glass ah-eady made, is destined for some windows in 
 the round part of the Temple Church, in which my friend the 
 Rev. J. L. Petit and myself are interested, I need not say that 
 you will all have an opportunity of judging for yourselves 
 whether or not the experiment is successful. It is, of course, 
 never wise to halloo till you are out of the wood, and, had I 
 foreseen the unavoidable delays that have retarded the manu- 
 facture, I should have declined addressing you at present. 
 However, as my name was actually put down, I did not think it 
 right to cause any fresh arrangements to be made, more parti- 
 cularly as I have reasonable grounds for believing in the success 
 of the experiment.^ 
 
 I have now to offer a few remarks in conclusion, which, con- 
 sidering the time I have already trespassed on your attention, I 
 have condensed as much as possible. I have to appeal to you, 
 the professors of the noblest of arts, in favour of this unhappy 
 art of glass-painting. I call it an art, because it is impossible to 
 look at the glass at Chartres, Angers, or Brussels, without 
 feeling that glass-painting was once practised by artists. I will 
 ask you by whom it is noio practised in this country ? for abroad 
 it is still artistical ; and further, whose fault is it that it con- 
 
 1 Mr. Hughes of Frith Street, who bury, Rushall, and Penn, Staffordshire ; 
 
 was usually employed by Mr. Winston Birstwith, Gargrave, Kildvvick, York- 
 
 on works in which he was interested, shire ; St. Asaph's Cathedral, and the 
 
 has given the names of many places Chapel of Kozel, Jerse3^ The first 
 
 where the new glass has been used, piece of blue glass successfully obtained 
 
 Among them arc the churches of Bush- is in Mr. Hughes' possession. 
 
184 ON A REVIVED MANUFACTURE OF 
 
 tinues in such bad hands ? It cannot be for lack of encourage- 
 ment, for I doubt not but that, if all the money that has been 
 expended on painted windows within the last twenty years were 
 added together, it would be found to equal, if not exceed, the 
 sums j^aid to Raphael or Michael Angelo. The fault lies in 
 those who have imbibed the exaggerated and rather senti- 
 mental estimate of the middle ages, which is so ftishionable; 
 who persist in regarding those ages at a distance which, soft- 
 ening down deformities, keeps mean and debasing objects out of 
 sight, and leaves only the more noble and lofty ones conspicuous ; 
 who suffer their feelings to be so captivated by the pleasing 
 phantom of their imagination as to admit neither beauty nor 
 propriety in anything that does not remind them of the middle 
 ages, and therefore prefer copies of mediaeval work to anything 
 that the art of the nineteenth century can invent. To such 
 persons I have long ceased to address mvself; it is no use 
 arguing against a man's feelings, however conclusive may be the 
 facts adduced. I therefore appeal to you, who possess collec- 
 tively so great an influence in these matters, whether it is enougli 
 to have improved in the manufacture of coloured glass? And 
 here I would especially address myself to the Greeks, with whom 
 I am connected by all my early associations, by my pagan 
 education. Is there any reason why painted glass should be 
 banished from buildings in the Classical style ? For Palladian 
 churches you have the cinque-cento style made to your hands, a 
 style susceptible of high artistical development, and which 
 neither in its treatment nor in its ornament is more severe than 
 the architecture of the building. I advert to the circumstance, 
 because in a neighbouring church — St. James's, Piccadilly — 
 mediaeval influences have so far triumphed as to cause the intro- 
 duction of painted glass more severe in style than the church 
 itself — glass which I have often heard made the theme of extra- 
 vagant admiration. And for churches in the Greek style, surely 
 it would not be difficult to form an artistically flat style; I say 
 flat, because a flat style may be made more severe than a rotund 
 style could be in painted glass, using the powerful and beautiful 
 colours whose resuscitation I have proclaimed, and resorting to 
 the pure models of antiquity for the forms. The researches of 
 Mr. Penrose and others have exploded the idea that weak colours 
 only are appropriate for the decoration of Greek architecture ; 
 why not, then, use deep colours in the windows, and shame the 
 mediae vals into some sort of improvement, by associating beauti- 
 ful colouring with exquisite drawing ? 
 
COLOURED GLASS USED IN AXCIEXT WINDOWS. 
 
 185 
 
 [In the Transactions of the Institute an account of a discussion 
 on glass-painting follows. In the course of it 3Ir. Winston, in 
 reply to an inquiry whether subjecting the paintings of ancient 
 ^Yindows to any alkaline wash had the effect of cleaning them 
 without rendering the colours crude by removing the softening 
 down of tone which time had produced, stated that he had 
 waslied a good number of pieces, and found tliat it had the effect 
 of making the colours purer. Some of the glass to which he had 
 applied the test was as clean as it was the day it was put by, 
 and the only reason he could assign for it was, that it contained 
 a greater quantity of silex than usual in proportion to the alkali, 
 and was, therefore, not so easily attacked by the atmosphere. It 
 was capable of being toned down, and then, certainly, some of 
 the colour must be lost. The glass in King's College Chapel, 
 Cambridge, was of the same date, and as light, as that used in 
 the cathedral at Brussels, and he had cleaned some of it, and 
 found the same result — that old glass cleaned had a better 
 effect than uncleaned glass of the same date ; but, compared 
 with modern glass, old glass, cleaned or uncleaned, will always 
 be found superior in tone and effect.] 
 
VIII. 
 ON THE METHODS OF PAINTING UPON GLASS. 
 
 An explanation given at the Ordinary General Meeting of the Royal Institute 
 of British Architects, March 7, 1853. 
 
 K. WINSTON gave a popular explanation of the 
 methods of painting upon glass. In the course 
 of it, he said,^ that no one could deny the fitness 
 of the enamel system for small cabinet works, 
 destined to be seen near the eye, allowing as 
 this system did for the utmost minuteness of 
 execution. That nothing could be more exqui- 
 site in its way than one of the works exhibited 
 at the Exhibition of 1851, entitled " Lucia Mondella," by Val- 
 secchi of Milan, in which the effect of a portrait in oil was 
 produced on glass with the most marvellous fidelity ; but that it 
 was not to such purposes as these that painted glass was ordi- 
 narily applied. That it was chiefly employed for works on a 
 large scale, and such as were intended to be viewed from a 
 distance. That for such works the Enamel system was not 
 suited ; because colour applied to glass with a brush could not 
 possibly be so brilliant as colour made in the glass-house. That, 
 in exemplification, thougli it was true that blue pot-metal glass 
 was nothing more than white glass mixed with cobalt and fused, 
 and that the enamel blue applicable to glass consisted of soft 
 white glass mixed with cobalt, which was fused upon the glass, yet 
 the greater and longer-continued heat of the glass-house, as com- 
 pared with that of the glass-painter's kiln, caused a more thorough 
 admixture of the vitreous v/ith the colouring particles to take 
 place, which occasioned the superior transparency, and conse- 
 quent brilliancy and power, of, for instance, coated blue glass, as 
 compared with white glass to which a blue tint had been im- 
 parted by means of enamel blue. That the dulness and want of 
 
 ^ The preceding part of the explanation is here omitted, as it does not 
 contain anything which is not more fully given in the present volume. 
 
ON THE METHODS OF PAINTING UPON GLASS. 187 
 
 power of enamel-colouring must be obvious to any one who had 
 seen the painted windows in the Barons' Hall, Arundel Castle ; 
 or Keynolds^s \^dndow at New College, Oxford ; or the west 
 window of Magdalen College, Oxford. 
 
 That the objection sometimes urged against the employment 
 of the mosaic system, the unavoidable use of lead- work to 
 connect the fabric, really applied with equal force to the enamel 
 system ; for that it was impossible to expose, without breaking 
 tliem, very large sheets of glass in the glass-painter's kiln to a 
 heat sufficient to vitrify the enamel colour, and thoroughly weld 
 it to the glass. That the largest sheets of painted glass that 
 had come to ]\tr. Winston's notice were exhibited in Hyde Park, 
 in 1851, by the St. Helen's Glass Company, but that in them 
 the enamel was barely vitrified, and was in consequence very 
 opaque, and Avould peel off in a few years ; and that these sheets 
 of glass, though interesting to the critical inquirer, and notwith- 
 standing the merits of Mr. Frank Howard's designs from which 
 they had been executed, must as glass-painting be admitted to 
 have been utter failures. That, supposing these sheets could 
 have been properly burnt, their size, whicli Mi\ AA'inston thought 
 could not have exceeded three feet by six feet, large as that 
 must be considered, was but small in comparison with the opening 
 of an ordinary window, and consequently that such a window 
 must be filled with several pieces of glass, which would render 
 the employment of a metal framework necessary to give stability 
 to the fabric. That in ordinary practice the pieces of glass of 
 which an enamel painting was composed, were cut into square 
 or rectangular forms, and held together with lead-work, which 
 gave the appearance of the pictures being covered with a black 
 net-work, as might be observed in Eeynolds's window at Oxford. 
 
 That, seeing that the employment of opaque metal-work in a 
 glass-painting might be considered as one of the conditions of 
 the branch of art, and that enamel glass-paintings never had the 
 depth or juiciness of oil-paintings nor the brilliancy of mosaic 
 glass-paintings, it appeared that the mosaic system of glass- 
 painting was on the whole best suited for large works. That 
 this was proved by the examination of paintings executed 
 according to the mosaic-enamel method, in which there was a 
 diminution of power or brilliancy in proportion as enamel- 
 colouring was substituted for coloured glass, or was employed as 
 a wash to heighten its effect. That the beautiful work by 
 Bertini, in the Great Exhibition, "Dante and his thoughts," 
 might be cited in support ; tliat this work, if seen in the ordi- 
 
188 ON THE METHODS OF PAINTING UPON GLASS. 
 
 nary position of a painted window, instead of being viewed from 
 a darkened apartment, would have looked dull in comparison 
 with old windows executed under the mosaic system, as those in 
 the chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament at Brussels. That, 
 instead of endeavouring to imitate oil-paintings which were 
 inimitable in glass, it seemed best on the whole for artists to 
 adopt that system of glass-painting under which, as in the 
 mosaic system, the most vivid effects of colour that human art 
 was capable of could be produced, and in which the necessary 
 lead-lines might be made conducive to the effect of the picture 
 instead of detracting from it ; and to design a glass-painting 
 with the object and intention of executing it according to a 
 system which afforded the artist very limited means of repre- 
 sentation as compared with oil or water-colour painting, and was 
 incapable at the very best of producing any great atmospheric 
 effect ; and, above all, with the intention of affecting the most 
 sudden and decided contrasts of light and shade — since, by this 
 means, the leads might be niost easily concealed from the 
 spectator, and pass unnoticed in the general crispness of the 
 picture. That the peculiar conditions of glass-painting seemed, 
 on the whole, to have been hitherto most completely complied 
 with in the windows of the chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament 
 in Brussels Cathedral, and in the windows of the choir of Lich- 
 field Cathedral, which were imported from Belgium, and were 
 nearly contemporary with the Brussels windows, the whole of 
 the windows in question having -been painted between 1534 and 
 1547. That it was not unreasonable to inquire what greater 
 pictorial effect could be desired than was displayed in these 
 windows. That, like fresco paintings (to which they bore a con- 
 siderable general resemblance), they were simple and grand, 
 and told their story fully and unmistakeably. That there could 
 be no question what sort of pictures these were ; that they were 
 glass-paintings, and nothing else, differing from oil-paintings in 
 their comparative want of atmosphere, and from both oil and 
 fresco paintings in their vivid and intense colouring ; yet dis- 
 playing in their composition and treatment the pains the artist 
 had taken to render them as pictorially perfect as the means 
 afforded. That in each window the subject was represented as 
 seen under the influence of broad sunshine, consistently with 
 wliich the most vivid contrasts of light and shade were introduced, 
 producing the utmost crispness of effect, and so artfully concealing 
 the lead-work, whilst the nature of the composition reminded 
 the spectator very forcibly of the means resorted to by the 
 
ON THE METHODS OF PAINTING UPON GLASS. 189 
 
 greatest of painters to correct in a freso-painting an unpleasing 
 degree of flatness — the successive archways introduced by 
 Raphael in his School of Athens. 
 
 That Mr. Winston was aware that in so strongly advocating 
 the adoption of the mosaic system of glass-painting in preference 
 to all others, and regarding the Brussels and Lichfield windows 
 as showing the utmost to which practical effect in a glass- 
 painting could be carried, he was acting in opposition to the 
 practice of such men as Capronnier of Brussels, Bertini of Milan, 
 and that crowd of German artists who had already done so much 
 to elevate glass-painting to a niche amongst the fine arts. But 
 that it should be remembered that those artists were, in all pro- 
 babihty, driven into the practice of laying down all their high 
 lights ^vith enamel-colour, and so destroying the vividness of the 
 w^orks, by the necessity of correcting, as much as possible, the 
 crudity and rawness of modern glass by every expedient in their 
 powder; and that, perhaps, they would return to a more com- 
 plete compliance with the practice of the ancient artists if they 
 possessed tlie same excellent material that they did. 
 
 In conclusion, i^Ir. Winston adverted to the fact that one of 
 the windows he had given to the Temple Church, painted by 
 ]\Ir. Hughes, was erected in that building ; that tlie glass of 
 which it was composed had been made by Messrs. Powell, from 
 analyses of ancient glass ; that the effect of this glass was all 
 that could be desired, and therefore that the time had at last 
 arrived when we might expect that works as harmonious in 
 colour, and much better di-awn than the best old specimens, 
 would be produced ; and that mediaeval painted windows would 
 be studied, not for direct imitation, but as objects of admiration, 
 and as affording hints for modern application. 
 
 In the discussion which followed, Mr. Winston, in reply to 
 an inquiry as to the effect of silver-coloured glass, said that he 
 considered the effect very good if the colour was not too deep. 
 He added that the practice of putting tinfoil behind glass was 
 known to the mediaeval artists ; there were some examples of it 
 in the wooden shrine of King Sebert in the choir of Westminster 
 Abbey. 
 
IX. 
 
 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS TO 
 BUILDINGS IN VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCHI- 
 TECTURE. 
 
 Read at the Ordinary General Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, 
 November 28th, 1853. 
 
 N composing this paper on Painted Glass with 
 reference to its employment in Buildings in 
 various styles of Architecture, I have endea- 
 voured as much as possible to keep in mind the 
 practical objects of this Society. Many matters, 
 therefore, of interest to the antiquary, will be 
 passed unnoticed, or with a brief allusion to 
 them — my object being, as far as I am able, to 
 supply an answer to the question, What is the kind of painted 
 glass best suited to a building of a given character ? 
 
 On a question so wide and complicated, it is not only natural 
 that very different opinions should exist, but extremely difficult 
 to ascertain which is the most correct. The inadequacy of 
 language to express ideas so subtle as those of which questions 
 of taste are composed, must ever be an insuperable obstacle to 
 bringing questions of taste to a certain determination by argu- 
 ment: a consideration which is condemnatory of the modern 
 vice of dogmatizing upon such subjects. And the nature of the 
 only remaining tribunal — the concurrent opinion of men of taste 
 — that is of men who have given their attention to such matters, 
 and whose views are respected by others engaged in the same 
 pursuits — of itself sanctions a great latitude of sentiment. The 
 feelings and habits, the education and temperament of indi- 
 viduals, even their natural appreciation of form or colour, all 
 insensibly influence their opinions on a subject respecting which 
 there exists no definite standard. I am therefore very far from 
 claiming any sort of infallibility for the views I am about to 
 submit to your consideration — views which I shall attempt to 
 support rather by calHng your attention to objects with which 
 you are already familiar, than by elaborate argument. 
 
Pl\.te 10. 
 
 ) 
 
 C. WINSTON. 
 
 LEIGUXON, BEOS. 
 
 GERMAN GLASS. 
 
 FROM THE COLLECTION OF THE LATE LORD HERBERT OF LEA. 
 
APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS, ETC. 191 
 
 The variety of buildings which may require to be decorated 
 with painted glass is great. Some are in the Greek or Palla- 
 dian styles of architecture, others are in the Gothic styles ; and 
 each building may be more or less grave or solemn in its aspect 
 than others of its class. Such differences in the buildings 
 demand, of course, corresponding differences in their painted 
 windows. But before entering upon this topic, it will be con- 
 venient to declare what I believe to be the best subjects for glass- 
 painting, and the best mode of executing them. With regard 
 to the mode of executing glass-paintings, I will recall your 
 attention to a paper which I read here, about a year ago, on the 
 Methods of Painting upon Glass. ^ In this, after stating that 
 there were three distinct modes of executing glass-paintings, — 
 viz., by the mosaic method, in which the local colouring of the 
 picture is produced by means of glass coloured in its manufacture, 
 the shadows and outlines only being executed with an enamel 
 colour; by the enamel method, in which the colouring of the 
 design is effected by using enamel colours ; and by the mosaic 
 enamel method, in which the colouring of the picture is produced 
 by a combination of the two former methods, — 1 concluded that 
 the mosaic method was the best ; because it was, from the nature 
 of the thing, more favourable than either of the others to a 
 display of the translucent quality of glass, and consequently of 
 its brilliant and powerful colours, whilst, at the same time, it 
 afforded the means of executing works as highly pictorial as the 
 windows of the transepts and north chapel of Brussels Cathedral 
 — works which maintain their superiority in point of effect, when 
 compared with a series of later examples, including some of the 
 most beautiful specimens that modern continental art can boast, 
 ^his conclusion, for the soundness of which I must refer you to 
 the paper I have named, and to the works of art therein men- 
 tioned, will confine our inquiry to what are the subjects best 
 adapted for representation in glass-paintings, executed according 
 to the mosaic method. 
 
 These subjects may be divided into the following classes: 
 patterns, similar to those used throughout the Mediaeval period, 
 and which usually consist of ornamental work in white glass, but 
 sometimes of scrolls of foliage, either white or coloured, on a 
 coloured ground ; pictures, where the objects are represented as 
 
 ^ * On the Methods of Pamting upon 1853, and published in the Transactions. 
 Glass,' read at the Ordinary General [It is the preceding memoir in this 
 Meeting of the Institute, 7th March, volume.] 
 
192 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 seen in one plane, as in a bas-relief — such as we see in the 
 painted windows of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; and 
 pictures, where the objects are represented as occupying several 
 planes, as in nature — such as we meet with in the painted 
 windows of the first half of the sixteenth century ; and, of course, 
 compositions consisting entirely of such patterns or pictures, or 
 partly of patterns and partly of pictures. To avoid any possible 
 misconception, I should perhaps here state that any reference to 
 Mediaeval examples in this paper is made only for the purpose 
 of illustration, and not with any intention of conveying an im- 
 pression that they are fit objects of imitation. Most valuable 
 hints are doubtless to be obtained from an enliohtened examina- 
 tion of such examples ; but before we think of copying them, we 
 ought to be quite sure that they are worth copying ; and I will 
 undertake to say that not one ancient example of painted glass, 
 except, perhaps, those consisting of pattern-work, can be con- 
 sidered as a perfect model for imitation. All, with the trifling 
 exceptions I have named, of whatever date, are defective in one 
 way or another, either in composition, drawing, or general effect. 
 Even the finest cinque-cento examples, which, taken collectively, 
 are perhaps of all ancient examples the least open to criticism, 
 were done at a time when the human figure was but imperfectly 
 understood by the glass-painters. And with regard to the often 
 expressed notion, that it is better to submit to copies of mediaeval 
 examples than trust to modern invention, permit me to say that 
 a more unjust imputation against the taste and skill of the 
 nineteenth century never was made, or a more complete apology 
 conceived for indolence and incapacity. Whose fault is it, I 
 would ask, that low art, at least in regard to glass-painting, 
 should seem to be almost inseparably associated with what are 
 called Church principles of architecture ? Are not the patrons 
 of the art to blame for indolently acquiescing in and sanctioning 
 a mere system of copying, because they have not sufficient 
 energy to study glass-painting thoroughly, and make themselves 
 acquainted with its principle ? We may depend on it, if glass- 
 painting, or I may say art in general, had a practical bearing on 
 the affairs of life, instead of only furnishing a means of amuse- 
 ment, we should no more hear of currency being given to such 
 doctrines respecting it, than we now hear engineers advocating 
 our going back to the single-condensing steam-engine, or tra- 
 vellers by railway yearning for a return to the old horse- 
 tracks. 
 
 The patterns to which I have alluded do obviously comply 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE. 193 
 
 with the conditions of the mosaic method in the fullest and 
 simplest manner ; for the brilliancy of the glass is altogether 
 unsubdued in these works, and the mechanical construction of 
 the window is in harmony with their design — the lead-w^ork 
 connecting the pieces of glass, either forming an integral part of 
 tlie pattern, or else actually constituting the pattern itself. I 
 may illustrate my meaning by a reference to familiar examples, 
 such as the Five Sisters, at York, and the geometrical pattern 
 works, executed in white glass, so common in the seventeenth 
 century, particularly on the Continent, of which engravings have 
 occasionally appeared in the 'Builder.' 
 
 Turning from these, the works which next appear the most 
 completely and simj)ly to comply with the conditions of the 
 mosaic method, are the pictm-es of the twelfth and thirteenth 
 centuries ; for, of all pictures, these admit of the employment of 
 glass of the most powerful hue, and diminish its brilliancy the 
 least. Here, also, the lead-work is made conducive to the effect 
 of the design. It is true that in the cinque-cento style we meet 
 with pictures in which, as in a bas-relief, all objects are repre- 
 sented as occupying one plane as effectively as in a picture of 
 the earher period ; but in no glass-paintings is the bas-relief 
 principle of representation effectively carried out with so much 
 simplicity as in the pictures of the twelfth and thirteenth cen- 
 turies. This, I apprehend, is owing no less to the nature of the 
 glass of which these works are formed, than to the composition 
 of the picture. This glass, when compared with the glass used 
 in later times, is remarkable for its apparent solidity ; a quality 
 which, without sensibly detracting from the brilliancy of the 
 glass, imparts great depth and richness to its hues. Hence 
 the artists of that early period were able to leave large breadths 
 of glass in their pictures unincumbered with any enamel colour 
 — with which, in the mosaic style, as I have already informed 
 you, the painting of the picture is performed — without incurring 
 the risk of producing a weak or flimsy effect. We all are aware 
 of the fact, that the shields of arms and the panel grounds, 
 which in later years were so profusely adorned with diaper 
 patterns, executed with the enamel bro^vn paint, are in. the works 
 of this period usually left quite plain ; the artists appearing to 
 rely for effect on the tone and richness of the material itself. So, 
 we perceive, on examining a figure in any one of these early 
 pictures, that whilst the deepest shadows are represented in the 
 simplest manner by opaque lines, and the shadows in half-tint 
 by a slight wash of enamel brown, the proportion of the glass 
 
 o 
 
194 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED CxLASS 
 
 left quite clear for the liigii lights is much larger than iu later 
 glass-paintings. That such a simple mode of execution, if applied 
 to a more pellucid and watery material, must necessarily produce 
 only a poor and flimsy eftect, may be learnt from the modern 
 copies of thirteenth-century glass. 
 
 But without dwelling on this point, I will call your attention 
 to the composition of a twelfth or thirteenth century picture, as 
 of itself ensuring distinctness without the aid of any great breadth 
 of shadow. This is simple enough : it consists in arranging the 
 figures in one line, usually as a bar crossing the picture; in 
 keeping the action of the figures as much as possible in the 
 direction of the plane of the picture, and in insulating and 
 separating the figures by the ground of the picture — a treatment, 
 as you perceive, corresponding with that of an antique bas-relief. 
 And since this treatment is in general more intelligibly carried 
 out in the earlier examples, I think we may venture to ascribe 
 it to the fuller influence of classical art at an early period of 
 glass-painting. In addition to this, as a general rule, the 
 colouring of the figures is kept lighter than that of the ground 
 of the panel. Of course these remarks are derived from an 
 examination of a great many examples. I mention this, because 
 I could easily contradict almost every one of them by a reference 
 to particular works. It is from a majority of specimens only 
 that a general principle is to be collected. The subjects to which 
 I have just alluded are necessarily characterised by a certain 
 archaic formality, arising from the stiffness of the colouring, and 
 the simplicity of the design and execution. 
 
 I have now to direct your attention to subjects of another class, 
 as remarkable for their pictorial effect. I mean the picture 
 glass-paintings of the first half, or, more correctly, of the second 
 quarter of the sixteenth century. These works are in many 
 respects the very opposites to those just described. Their 
 colouring is harmonious rather than deep, and they are highly 
 finished — peculiarities which I could show to be connected with 
 the nature of the glass employed in these works, which, without 
 being as flimsy and pellucid as ordinary modern glass, is yet 
 very inferior in depth and richness to that of the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries. Still these works will be found to comply 
 with the conditions of the mosaic method, after making allowance 
 for their different nature, equally with the works of the twelfth 
 and thirteenth centuries ; and I hope I shall be able to prove 
 that they are entitled to equal estimation. Their composition 
 is various, consisting sometimes, as in the pictures of the twelfth 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF AECHITECTURE. 195 
 
 and thirteenth centuries, only of a line of figures occupying a 
 single plane ; but more commonly of a group — of foreground 
 figures, it is true, but which in parts recede from the eye : the 
 figures not unfrequently occupying in plan the arc of a semi- 
 circle, as in some of Kaphael's designs ; and beyond the figures 
 some distant object is usually represented, such as the sky, or a 
 landscape. The picture, therefore, is designed on the principle 
 of- representing depth, and, in the best examples, is executed in 
 such a manner as to produce the effect of depth. The means 
 resorted to for this purpose are very simple. First may be 
 noticed the choice of such subjects as are capable, without a 
 violation of probability, of being represented in a somewhat 
 severe, if not harsh manner : thus a landscape, or a sea-piece, a 
 full idea of which cannot be conveyed without representing the 
 graduated tints and soft outlines of nature, \vas never, at this 
 period, selected as the principal subject of a glass-painting. On 
 the contrary, when a landscape background is adopted, it is used 
 merely as an accessory, to set off and relieve a group of fore- 
 ground figures, in which all the interest of the composition 
 centres. And secondly, we may remark, that all the objects in 
 the picture are represented as if they were seen under the 
 influence of broad sunshine ; a mode of treatment the most 
 favourable, not only to a display of bright lights and sharp 
 decided shadows, but to the general transparency of the picture, 
 it being possible by this means to separate the various objects 
 from each other, without having recourse to extensive masses of 
 shadow or concentration of light, the use of which, however 
 effective in the works of Rembrandt and other oil-painters, is 
 wholly unsuited to the conditions of glass-painting, on account 
 of its very limited scale of transparent shade. The heaviness 
 resulting from the adoption of the opposite principle of concen- 
 trating the light in the middle of the picture and keeping the 
 rest in comparative obscurity, is shown in the upper subject of 
 the west window of New College Chapel, Oxford, and in the west 
 window of Magdalen College Chapel, and in a variety of modern 
 works ; and the superiority of the sunshine principle becomes 
 apparent on comparing these works with others in which it is 
 adopted, as the windows of the North Chapel of Brussels 
 Cathedral, those of St. Jacques Church, Liege, or the windows 
 of Lichfield Cathedral. 
 
 A glance at the drawings on the wall, of portions of the glass 
 at Brussels and Lichfield, will explain my meaning better than 
 any words I can employ. We there see that the figures are cut 
 
 o2 
 
196 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 out from the background, and the architecture from the sky or 
 landscape, as much by the opposition of light and shade as by 
 the local colours ; and thus the crispness and clearness of a sun- 
 shine effect is not only highly conducive to the brilliancy of the 
 window, but is most favourable to the concealment of the leads, 
 which form part of and are wholly lost in the sharply defined 
 shadows with which the foreground objects are bounded, and 
 even in the background are, on a close view, not unfrequently 
 absorbed in the colouring, but at all events pass unobserved in 
 the general crispness of the picture, when it is viewed from the 
 proper distance. Of course I am not speaking of the broad 
 modern lead used in repairs of old glass, but of the ancient leads 
 themselves, which never, until almost the beginning of the 
 seventeenth century, exceeded three-sixteenths of an inch in 
 width. In cinque-cento glass-paintings, therefore, the lead-work 
 forms an integral part of the design, equally as in a twelfth or 
 thirteenth century picture. And these works also evince a 
 thorough compliance with the mosaic system in preserving the 
 translucent qualities of glass. A cinque-cento glass picture, not- 
 withstanding the power of its shadows and high finish, which 
 entirely save it from the charge of weakness or poverty, is still a 
 brilliant and diaphanous glass picture ; owing, partly to the 
 crisp treatment alluded to, partly to the care taken to leave 
 considerable portions of the glass, though not such relatively 
 large portions as may be seen in the works of the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries, unencumbered with enamel brown. But 
 without going further into the minutiae of the subject, I will ask 
 any one accustomed to compare glass-paintings of different 
 dates, whether in any so high a pictorial effect has been pro- 
 duced, with so little diminution of brilliancy, as in the works of 
 the second quarter of the sixteenth century. 
 
 You will perceive that from this summary I have omitted all 
 notice of glass-paintings of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 
 I have done so from a conviction that the nearest approach to an 
 artistically flat style of representation is to be found in the works 
 of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; and that the nearest 
 approach to an artistically rotund style of representation is to be 
 found in the works of the second quarter of the sixteenth century ; 
 and that there is nothing to choose between a really flat and a 
 really rotund style. At first sight there is, I admit, but little 
 difference between a thirteenth-century and a fourteenth-century 
 picture in point of composition ; but a closer examination 
 generally brings to light various minute differences, tending to 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURK. 197 
 
 show, either that the artists of the fourteenth century were 
 already contemplating a change from flatness to rotundity of 
 representation, or that they did not strictly adhere to their pre- 
 decessors' rules for ensuring distinctness in a flat style. The 
 inconsistency, not unfrequently seen in works of the thirteenth 
 century, of representing the figure in relief, but omitting to 
 indicate the recess of the niche in which the figure is supposed 
 to stand — a mistake which perhaps arose from imitating in glass 
 too literally the designs of ancient goldsmith's work, where, as 
 everybody knows, embossed figures are often stuck on a flat 
 ground, having architectural forms drawn in outline upon it — is 
 repeated and exaggerated in pictures of the nineteenth century. 
 Indeed, most of the fourteenth-century groups that, according to 
 the usual fashion of the day, are surmounted with shrine-work, 
 look just like groups painted on flat panels, fringed by way of 
 ornament with spires and crockets ; so completely does the 
 apparent flatness of the canopy, rendered no doubt more con- 
 spicuous by the increased elaboration of its details, correspond 
 with the flatness of an ordinary panel. And the figures them- 
 selves, owing partly to the increased breadth of their draperies, 
 inattention to the principle of insulating them by means of the 
 ground colour of the panel, and a bad selection of the colours of 
 the drapery, certainly do not in general appear at a distance so 
 distinct as the figures in a thirteenth-century picture. I therefore 
 cannot but regard the fourteenth-century style of glass-painting 
 as inferior to the thirteenth, and the fifteenth-century style as 
 inferior to that of the fourteenth. The fifteenth century was 
 evidently passed in the effort to get out of a flat style of repre- 
 sentation into a rotund one. It is true that all the pictures of 
 this period appear to be flat, but they are flat in eftect only, and 
 not on principle ; their flatness is the result of imbecility, not of 
 design. They are designed as much on the principle of depth 
 as a cinque-cento glass-painting, but they do not, like it, produce 
 the effect of depth, because their designers were ignorant of the 
 means of attaining the desired result. As in a cinque-cento glass- 
 painting, so in one of the fifteenth century, the figures are not 
 unfrequently arranged on the arc of a semicircle, and are not 
 cut out or separated from each other by stiff colour. And that 
 the intention was to represent depth is plain from the represen- 
 tation of distant objects, of sky and landscape, coloured with 
 considerable regard to the hues of nature ; but, contrary to the 
 practice of the cinque-cento artists, the shadows are sometimes 
 misplaced, and are always too weak; and the gradations of 
 
198 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 colouring, though such gradations might have been as easily 
 made as in cinque-cento work, the nature of the material being 
 the same in both cases, are not sufficiently attended to. Hence 
 the glass-pictures of the fifteenth century, beautiful as they 
 sometimes are in detail, remind one in general of an assemblage 
 of court cards. They frequently produce no other effect, even at 
 a moderate distance, than that of a mosaic composed of strangely- 
 shaped pieces of glass of various colours. I think, therefore, that 
 we may leave the works of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries 
 as objects chiefly interesting to the antiquary. 
 
 Having thus indicated, as briefly as I could, the sort of 
 subjects which appear to be most suited for glass-paintings, I 
 will endeavour to show what sort of glass-paintings are best 
 suited for particular buildings. And here the real difficulty of 
 the subject may be said to commence ; for since no example of 
 contemporary glazing is to be found in any building earlier than 
 the middle ages, it is only by analogy that we can arrive at the 
 fitness of painted glass for classical buildings, if we rely on expe- 
 rience as a guide ; and in a matter of this sort I fear there is no 
 guide so trustworthy as experience. 
 
 It will be admitted, I apprehend, that the earlier Gothic 
 styles are more severe in their architectural character than the 
 later ones ; and I think that you will likewise admit, on reflec- 
 tion, that the glass most in harmony with Gothic buildings in 
 the Norman or Early English styles is that of the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries. I have tried for a long time past to dis- 
 cover the reason of this conformity, and have arrived at the 
 conclusion that the harmony between the painted windows and 
 the architecture depends far more on the colouring of the 
 windows than on their design. I have often contemplated the 
 general effect of thirteenth century, of fifteenth century, and 
 even of sixteenth century painted glass, in the windows of a 
 Norman or Early Englisli building, from a distance too great for 
 admitting of my making out the design with any degree of 
 distinctness, and have invariably observed that the colouring 
 of the earlier glass most accorded with the character of the 
 architecture, and that the harmony was the same, whether the 
 windows were almost entirely formed of white glass, like the Five 
 Sisters at York, or were richly coloured, as at Bourges or Can- 
 terbury. As might have been expected, I have not met with 
 the same opportunities of contrasting the effect of thirteenth- 
 century painted glass with that of the fifteenth or sixteenth 
 century, in reference to its harmony with the architecture of the 
 
TO YAKIOUS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE. 199 
 
 sixteenth century, but sucli experiments as I have been able to 
 make have tended to create an impression on my mind, that the 
 glass-paintings of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries do har- 
 monise more completely with the character of the architecture 
 of the fifteenth century than the glass-paintings of the thirteenth. 
 However, without pressing the last point, I will venture to 
 express a firm belief that the colouring of a sixteenth-century 
 glass-painting does harmonise better witli the character of a 
 building in the Eenaissance style than that of a thirteenth- 
 century glass-painting. 
 
 In these conclusions I would beg you to observe that I have 
 been influenced by the general effect of the glass-painting, rather 
 than by its force, because I have remarked that good cinque-cento 
 glass-paintings, which are hardly if at all inferior in power to 
 Early English ones, do not in general harmonise with tliirteenth 
 century buildings so completely as the windows of the thirteenth 
 century. The inference I draw from these experiments is, that 
 there is an analogy between the colouring of twelfth and thir- 
 teenth century windows, and buildings remarkable for the gravity 
 and solemnity of their appearance. And this, when the nature 
 of the colouring of these windows is analysed, will I tliink be 
 found to accord with Sir Joshua Eeynolds's views. He says in 
 his fourth Discourse, ** With respect to colouring, though it may 
 appear at first a part of painting merely mechanical, yet it still 
 has its rules, and those grounded on that presiding principle 
 which regulates both the great and the little in the study of the 
 painter. By this the first effect of the picture is produced, and 
 as this is performed, the spectator, as he walks the gallery, will 
 stop or pass along. To give a general air of grandeur at first 
 view, all trifling or artful play of little lights, or an attention to 
 a variety of tints, is to be avoided. A quietness and simplicity 
 must reign over the whole work, to which a breadth of uniform 
 and simple colour will very much contribute. Grandeur of 
 effect is produced by two different ways, which seem entirely 
 opposed to each other. One is by reducing the colours to little 
 more than chiaro-oscuro, which was the practice of the Bolognian 
 schools, and the other by making the colours very distinct and 
 forcible, such as we see in those of Rome and Florence. But 
 still the presiding principle of both those manners is simplicity. 
 Certainly nothing can be more simple than monotony : and the 
 distinct blue, red, and yellow colom^s which we see in the dra- 
 peries of the Roman and Florentine schools, though they have 
 not that kind of harmony which is produced by a variety of 
 
200 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 broken and transparent colours, have that effect of grandeur 
 which was intended. Perhaps these distinct colours strike the 
 mind more forcibly, from there not being any great union 
 between them ; as martial music, which is intended to rouse the 
 nobler passions, has its effect from the sudden and strongly 
 marked transitions from one note to another, which that style of 
 music requires ; whilst in that which is intended to move the 
 softer passions, the notes imperceptibly melt into one another." 
 Now if we compare the colouring of a thirteenth-century glass- 
 painting with that of a cinque-cento one, we perceive that the 
 colouring of the former, consists of an assemblage of powerful, 
 distinct, positive tints, skilfully arranged, but more on the simple 
 principle of a mosaic than on the more blended principle of a 
 painting, whilst the tints of the latter are less forcible, less 
 decided, and more blended together. I have seen some cinque- 
 cento glass-pictures in which there is no red, and but little 
 positive blue, the colouring being almost entirely composed of 
 secondary tints, and in which the transition from one tint to 
 another is scarcely more marked or sudden than is the case in 
 some of Titian's pictures. These considerations may perhaps be 
 sufficient of themselves to justify the opinion that the colouring 
 of an Early English glass-painting is more calculated to produce 
 a grave and solemn effect than that of a cinque-cento one ; but 
 in acceding to this opinion we ought not to overlook the fact, 
 that the tone of colour of an Early English glass-painting is cool, 
 and that the tone of colour of a cinque-cento glass-painting is 
 warm, and that a cool tone of colour of itself has a tendency to 
 produce a grave effect, and a warm tone to produce a gay effect. 
 K these views are correct, it follows that we ought not only to 
 continue to employ, for the windows of twelfth and thirteenth 
 century buildings, glass-paintings similar to those of the twelfth 
 and thirteenth centuries, as regards the tone and principle of the 
 colouring, but that we ought to glaze in a similar manner the 
 windows of all other buildings which can be said to possess an 
 air of gravity and solemnity equal to that of a twelfth or thir- 
 teenth century building : using of course weaker colours, warmer 
 tones, and a more elaborate mode of execution for the windows 
 of buildings in a less severe style. Some people are of opinion 
 that in no style but the Gothic can so solemn an effect be 
 produced ; but it seems to me that the solemn character of a 
 building depends rather on its plan and arrangement than on the 
 style of its details. A Norman cathedral is as solemn as a 
 Gothic one, and parts of the Colosseum at Rome are, I am told, 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF AECHITECTURE. 20l 
 
 as gloomy and solemn as the aisles of a Norman building. The 
 rule therefore might well apply to certain ecclesiastical buildings 
 in the Koman style of architecture, and I see no reason why it 
 should not equally apply to certain ecclesiastical buildings in 
 the Greek style ; certainly these buildings, owing to the sim- 
 plicity of their plan, do not possess the gloomy effect of a Gothic 
 cathedral, but the extreme severity of the architecture imparts 
 to them an air of gravity and solemnity Avhich I apprehend is 
 rarely equalled by a twelfth or thirteenth century building of 
 corresponding dimensions. 
 
 I am quite aware that the employment of rich and deep 
 colouring in windows has a tendency to diminish the apparent 
 size of a building, and I am ready to admit that it is to a fear of 
 producing this result that we may attribute the modern practice 
 of decorating the windo^YS of a Greek building with glass too 
 faint in its hues to rescue it from the imputation of washiness. 
 But it is by no means necessary to go into the oj^posite extreme. 
 A glass-painting entirely composed of white glass would har- 
 monise with the character of Greek architecture equally as well 
 as one principally composed of coloured glass, provided that the 
 white glass was, like that of the twelfth and thii'teenth centuries, 
 solid in appearance, and had a rich cool tone. And even when 
 the employment of a larger proportion of coloured glass might 
 be desirable, it would always be possible to make the window 
 recede from the eye, by using in it a predominating quantity of 
 blue and white. But whether the advocates for powerfully 
 coloured, or for white windows, as being most in keeping with 
 the character of a Greek building, are right, I trust that all will 
 agree in preferring rich tints to poor ones. Had the ancient 
 Greeks glazed their ^vindows, we may be certain that they would 
 have used glass of rich tint, whether it was white or whether it 
 was coloured. For amongst all the ancient Greek glass vessels 
 that I have examined, I have never met with any of a poor tint 
 or flimsy appearance in point of colour or texture of the glass. 
 And indeed so closely does the glass composing these remains 
 resemble in its appearance and cliemical analysis the window- 
 glass of the twelfth century (from which that of the thirteenth 
 differs but little), that were I desirous of forming an idea of what 
 Greek window-glass would have been like, I should endeavour 
 to call to recollection the tints of Suger's glass at St. Denys, or 
 that of the glass in the west triplet of Chartres. And besides, 
 the remains of strong colour used in the decoration of ancient 
 (xreek buildings leads to the inference that the ancients, had 
 
202 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 they used window-glass at all, would have employed that pos- 
 sessing a rich tint, from choice as well as necessity. We are still 
 less without authority to guide us in regard to the design for 
 windows proper for ecclesiastical buildings in the Greek or 
 Koman style of architecture. 
 
 The views I have expressed with reference to the colouring of 
 these windows must confine me to an advocacy of a simple flat 
 system of representation, because pictures composed on the 
 principle of representing depth cannot properly be executed in 
 glass entirely consisting of strong rich tints. The only attempt 
 I have hitherto seen at designing windows for a Greek building- 
 is at the Church of St. Vincent de Paul at Paris. But however 
 worthy of notice these windows may be as an embodiment of a 
 new idea, they are neither sufficiently delicate in design, nor 
 simple in execution, to serve as models for our imitation. It is 
 very possible that this defectiveness may be in a great measure 
 attributable to the thinness and watery character of the glass of 
 which they are composed, and to the efforts of the artist to dis- 
 guise the badness of the material by a more elaborate execution ; 
 but such expedients are no longer necessary, since, as I have 
 before informed you,^ the manufacture of twelfth-century glass 
 has been revived. This I have always considered the more 
 fortimate, on account of the use that might be made of it in the 
 embellishment of classical architecture, consistently with which, 
 unlike the Gothic, art may be fully developed. 
 
 There can be no doubt that valuable hints might be derived 
 from an examination of the designs of ancient sculpture, and 
 even of tessellated pavement. Indeed, classical designs, admirably 
 adapted for glass-paintings, are engraved from sculpture in 
 Pistolesi's ' Vatican ; ' the most remarkable one is given in the 
 second volume, plate 3.^ These designs consist of figures and 
 ornaments in one plane, and therefore, if executed in glass, as I 
 have recommended, would a good deal resemble some of the 
 works of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. These mediaeval 
 works must appear to the most careless observer to be defective 
 in many respects, particularly in relief. When viewed closely, 
 the intention of the artist to biing out the various projections of 
 the figure and drapery, by means of strong black lines, is often 
 
 ^ See paper 'On a revived Manu- tions. (P. 175 of the present volume.) 
 
 focture of Coloured Glass used in ancient ^ < n Vaticano descritto et illustrate 
 
 Windows/ read at the Ordinary General da Erasmo Pistolesi,' Roma, 1829 ; see 
 
 Meeting of the Institute, 14th June, also vol. v. plate 81, and vol. ii. plate 4. 
 1852, and published in the Transac- 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCHITECTUEE. 203 
 
 admirable, especially as seen in the heads of the figures; but, 
 sometimes from want of boldness, sometimes from a want of 
 knowledge were to place the shadow. Early English figures in 
 glass, when viewed from a little distance, are too apt to appear 
 like flat surfaces ; quite as flat as, if not more flat than, the men 
 and horses appear to be in those copies of the inner frieze of the 
 Parthenon, which, placed in situations distant from the eye, and 
 exposed to the influence of full light, are used to decorate the 
 outsides of some of our public buildings. 
 
 I am far from agreeing with those who contend that no greater 
 relief ought to be imparted to a simple flat glass-painting than 
 is given to those flat relievi from the cella of the Parthenon. 
 For those who urge such views seem to have entirely overlooked 
 the original situation of these relievi, placed where no direct 
 light could reach them. To use the words of one of our most 
 accomplished artists : " it is a great mistake to suppose that the 
 flat style of relief was intended to appear flat ; and it is a great 
 mistake to apply it in situations, as in the open air, where it 
 must appear so, and be indistinct besides." ^ In accordance with 
 this authority, I will venture to say that quite as much relief 
 ought to be given to the figures in the simplest and flattest glass- 
 painting, as is given to the alti-relievi in the metopes of the 
 Parthenon, which were intended to be seen in the open air, and 
 from a distance. I throw out these observations, however, rather 
 with reference to those w^ho may be about to design simple flat 
 glass-paintings for mediaeval buildings. For since I am perfectly 
 sure that none but first-rate artists can design windows fit for 
 classical buildings, I may well be content to leave the matter 
 entirely in their hands ; and can only express my surprise that 
 a field so favourable to a display of the highest art should have 
 been so long neglected. Flaxman's labours sufficiently shoAV the 
 possibility of employing the exquisite language of the ancients 
 to express true Christian sentiment ; and some of his choicest 
 designs might advantageously be reproduced in painted windows 
 for classical buildings, were it only by w^ay of proving to the 
 public what works of art painted wdndows might become in com- 
 petent hands. 
 
 I shall trouble you with but few remarks on the selection 
 of glass-paintings for buildings in the Palladian style of architec- 
 ture, in which I would include all Wren's churches, and even 
 
 ' ' Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Arts,' by Sir Charles Eastlake, 
 Pres. R.A., p. 104. 
 
204 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 St. Paul's itself; for though that building has in parts a Koman 
 severity, its interior in particular, bears many marks of the taste 
 of the seventeenth century, especially in the ornamental details. 
 Such buildings, taken on the whole, are less severe in character 
 than true Eoman or Grecian buildings, and therefore would 
 seem to require a corresponding relaxation in the character of 
 their painted windows. In my opinion, no greater mistake is 
 committed than when a stiff Byzantine style of decoration is 
 applied to the windows of a Palladian building. I have 
 heard it defended on the ground that, since sach glass would 
 harmonise with the character of a Roman building, it ought 
 equally to harmonise with the character of a Palladian one, 
 because both styles of architecture have a common origin — in 
 the old Eoman : an argument which is at once disposed of by 
 this remark, that the Romanesque style betrays its more im- 
 mediate origin in the Greek character of its ornaments, and 
 some of its mouldings, from which character the Palladian is 
 free. I have also heard it defended on the supposed necessity 
 of imparting a more religious air to a Palladian church. But 
 surely there must be other and more legitimate ways of 
 increasing the solemnity of a building, than by the introduction 
 of incongruous ornaments and decorations, which oppress the 
 architecture by their severity. Who would think of encrusting 
 the walls of St. Paul's Cathedral with stiff Byzantine mosaics ? 
 I believe that it is amongst the works of the cinque-cento period 
 that the true models for painted windows suitable for Palladian 
 churches are to be sought. Amongst these works, as has been 
 remarked, many varieties of design and character may be seen. 
 Some are more solemn and grave than others, but the blended 
 and comparatively undecided colouring of even the most simple 
 renders them less solemn and severe tlian the ordinary works of 
 the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. In most matters of detail 
 also, cinque-cento glass-paintings accord with Palladian architec- 
 ture. So that, on the whole, the cinque-cento style of glass-painting, 
 as developed in its best specimens, seems more suited than any 
 other known style for the windows of Palladian buildings. 
 
 In adopting this style, the glass-painter, as before stated, is by 
 no means confined to the use of pictures having receding back- 
 grounds, but may use as flat a composition as a line of well- 
 relieved figures, placed in front of a sheet of tapestry ; or even, 
 in small works, or in the accessory parts of greater w^orks, he 
 would find authority for the employment of well-relieved figures 
 on perfectly flat-coloured grounds. . The use of receding pictures 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE. 205 
 
 in painted glass in any building, of any style, has however been 
 strenuously objected to ; and the present seems a good oppor- 
 tunity of inquiring a little into the validity of the objection. 
 
 It proceeds, as far as I can understand, on two grounds — the 
 first being, the supposed unfitness of the material for any sort of 
 representation more pictorial than tlie mosaics of the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries ; the second, the supposed impropriety of 
 representing a receding picture on the wall of any building. In 
 support of the first ground of objection, we are told that a glass- 
 painting reverses the conditions of nature, by making the lights 
 transparent, and the shadows opaque ; that the violence of its 
 colouring is wholly opposed to pictorial effect, and that to bound 
 objects with black lines is reprehensible on every artistic con- 
 sideration. The first of these arguments is at once disposed of 
 by the observation, that we have nothing to do with anything 
 but the effect of a glass-painting ; and that when the material is, 
 like that of the cinque-cento period, of a horn-like texture, the 
 high lights do not appear to be less solid than the shadows. 
 
 AYith regard to the two other objections, I admit that they 
 would be unanswerable if it were true that an artist was pre- 
 cluded from painting a picture under any other than the most 
 favourable conditions. But to assert this would be to fly in the 
 face of all authority — and what is worse, to contradict all 
 experience. According to such a rule, Eaphael was blameable 
 for making designs, such as the Cartoons, to be worked in 
 tapestry — " a mode of representation,^' says Sir Charles Eastlake, 
 " which in the early part of the sixteenth century was far from 
 exhibiting even the comparative force of colour, and light, and 
 shade, which it afterwards attained." He should, according to 
 the above rule, have condescended to no means of representation 
 less complete than what oil-painting affords. Nevertheless, his 
 availing himself of such restricted means of representation, 
 which doubtless was imposed on him by some necessary con- 
 dition, so far from being made a matter of imputation, has but 
 increased the reputation of the artist. To use again the words 
 of Sir Charles Eastlake, — whose admirable 'Essay on the Styles 
 and Methods of Painting ' should be carefully read by those who 
 interest themselves in glass-painting, — "With a view to such 
 faint transcripts (the tapestries) the great artist worked. He 
 knew that his di-awings would be transferred to them, and that 
 in the tapestries alone, possibly, his designs might live. Dis- 
 tinctness was nevertheless attained without any sacrifice of such 
 of the proper attributes of painting as were compatible with the 
 
206 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 means employed, and without any violation of probability. 
 When we consider the great qualities which were combined with 
 these requisites, — when we find that such apparently unpromising 
 conditions had the effect of raising even Kaphael above himself, 
 we can hardly refuse to admit, that a due employment of limited 
 means of representation may at least invite attention to the most 
 important attributes of art." ^ Unless therefore the conditions 
 of glass-painting are so opposed to pictorial effect as to render 
 the attempt to produce it nugatory, I can see no possible reason 
 for an artist declining to fill the windows of a building with 
 pictures in which the art of representation is carried further 
 than in the glass-paintings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 
 In many cases it might be extremely desirable that he should do 
 so — for there are subjects, very proper to be represented in 
 places of worship, which are either wholly incapable of repre- 
 sentation in a simple flat style, or, when attempted to be so 
 represented, only prove how easily the line which separates 
 sublimity from absurdity may be overstepped. But when 
 pictures in painted glass, representing receding objects, actually 
 do exist, in the contemplation of which we forget the limited 
 means the artist had at command, and in which excellences 
 are discovered such as are unattainable except in a painted 
 window, the ground of objection to which I have addressed 
 myself appears to fail altogether. 
 
 The remaining objection, that it is wrong to represent a 
 receding picture on the wall of a building, and consequently in 
 a window, the glazed surface of which is but a continuance of 
 that wall — seems to rest less on a consideration of facts, or the 
 dictates of our external senses, than on a sort of mock philosophy, 
 which seeks to escape laborious investigation by the enunciation 
 of a " principle " — than which, by the way, nothing is more easy. 
 It may be conceded that to carry a receding picture all round a 
 room produces an ill effect. But pictures, though representing 
 the effect of depth and distance even almost to illusion, are 
 admitted to be allowable, provided they occupy only a portion 
 of the wall, either by being hung against it in a frame, or by 
 being actually painted upon it, — the latter sort indeed can plead 
 the testimony of ages in its favour. If then a glass-painting 
 should have the illusion of distance, it would be unobjectionable, — 
 because, necessarily, it could occupy only part of the side of the 
 
 ^ ' Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Arts,' by Sir Charles Eastlake, 
 133. 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCfllTECTUKE. 207 
 
 room or building containing it. And as we are accustomed to 
 see out of a building by looking through its windows, those who 
 mistook the painting for a real object might easily stretch the 
 imagination a little further, and conchide that it was some object 
 placed outside the building, until its unreality became apparent 
 from the figures continuing to remain motionless. But, in truth, 
 I suspect that no one ever mistook the representation of any 
 object in a painted window, not even a landscape, for the reality, 
 or, except whilst his attention was exclusively devoted to the 
 painting, imagined that his view extended beyond the limits of 
 the building : a feeling which for the moment might be equally 
 excited by the contemplation of a picture hung in a frame 
 against the wall. The instant the glass-painting was regarded 
 with reference to the building, it would be perceived to be 
 nothing else than a coloured superficies, whose plane lay in the 
 same direction with that of the wall in which it was inserted. 
 It might indeed sometimes happen that, for the sake of pre- 
 serving distinctness at a very great distance, a glass-painting, in 
 which figures were represented on a flat ground, would be pre- 
 ferable to one having a receding background. But I think that 
 the glass-painter need be deterred by no other consideration 
 from employing a receding design, if he thought proper. Indeed, 
 a glass-painting having a sky or landscape background, such as 
 we meet with in good cinque-cento examples in general, would 
 be peculiarly suitable for a window at the end of a building, on 
 account of the retiring nature of most of its hues. I conclude 
 therefore that in the preparation of painted windows for classical 
 edifices, the artist has the choice of a more or less severe style 
 of representation, to be used according to the character of the 
 building he is required to decorate ; and that the type of the one 
 style is to be found in the remains of twelfth and thirteenth 
 century mosaics, and that the type of the other is to be found 
 in the glass-paintings of the second quarter of the sixteenth 
 century. The artist might, I apprehend, be guided by similar 
 principles in preparing painted windows for buildings in the 
 Gothic styles. 
 
 I have already stated my belief that the glass-paintings of 
 the twelfth and thirteenth centuries are most in harmony with the 
 architecture of those respective periods, and therefore think that 
 such of those works as most consistently carry out the simple 
 flat style of representation ought to be regarded, with but few 
 exceptions, not indeed as objects to be reproduced in copies, but 
 as guides to assist the artist in forming new and original designs. 
 The principle of an ancient composition might be more strictly 
 
208 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 adhered to now than at any former period, on account of the 
 revived manufacture of tlie window-glass of the twelfth century ; 
 but this recommendation by no means would involve the 
 necessity of copying the object itself. Indeed, nothing is more 
 thoroughly opposed to sound sense and good taste than a mere 
 servile copy of an ancient glass-painting, or a copy with such 
 trifling modifications as to be little else than a servile copy. If 
 intended as a counterfeit, it must fail in its object — for none but 
 the inexperienced are likely to be deceived by it — and once 
 known to be a counterfeit, it would lose all interest from associa- 
 tion with by-gone ages. If intended to pass for nothing more 
 than a copy, under the bona fide impression that nothing except 
 a copy of ancient painted glass will harmonise with Gothic 
 architecture, it serves but as a cover for indolence — it can 
 advance nothing, because a copy is sure to fall short of the 
 original in all real merit; and besides this, its production 
 amounts to an unconscious satire on Gothic architecture, when 
 we consider the imperfect state of the art of representation as 
 displayed in ancient windows. The only true course is to treat 
 every modern work in painted glass as an original work of the 
 nineteenth century, — and as such, to test it according to intelli- 
 gible rules of taste. The inquiry ought no longer to be confined to 
 the narrow issue of conformity with some ancient authority, but 
 should extend to a consideration of its intrinsic merit as a worlc 
 of art, and its extrinsic merit as being in harmony with the 
 architecture with which it is associated. To prescribe so wide a 
 field of inquiry might, indeed, prove inconvenient to certain 
 critics, but would certainly tend to a more zealous investigation 
 of the principles of ancient art than heretofore, and to the pro- 
 duction of works more worthy of the nineteenth century : in short, 
 it is by this means only that any progress can be made. 
 
 A nineteenth-century window, designed for a twelfth or 
 thirteenth century building, ought not only to harmonise with 
 the architecture in the quality and treatment of its colouring, 
 but, besides restraining conventionality within due bounds, 
 should likewise be free not merely from the bad drawing, 
 but from the quaint and contorted attitudes of the figures 
 of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries ; attitudes which, how- 
 ever fashionable they might have been at that period, are 
 shocking to our present tastes and feelings. It should, in fact, 
 reproduce nothing but the art of that period, the genuine- 
 ness of which will only appear the plainer, when the film of bad 
 taste and deformity is stripped from it, through which we are 
 now obliged to penetrate before we can fairly see it. I should 
 
TO VARIOUS STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE. 209 
 
 add tliat, in designing a window for a twelfth-century bnilding, 
 the artist can never do wrong in going at once to the fountain 
 head, and correcting his taste by tlie remains of classical art, 
 whose influence is so easily recognised in the glass-paintings of 
 the 12tli and 13th centuries. 
 
 A consideration of the colouring best suited, for the windows 
 of a fourteenth-century building presents an interesting subject 
 of inquiiy, but into this I cannot, for want of time, particularly 
 enter. 
 
 The glazing of the fourteenth century, until about the year 1380, 
 in respect of the quality and disposition of its colouring, holds in 
 general a sort of middle place between the rich mosaics of the 
 thirteenth century and tlie paler picture glass-paintings of the 
 fifteenth ; its individual colours being as cool, and almost, if not 
 quite, as poAverful as those of the thirteenth century, but being 
 intermixed with a much larger proportion of white glass, and used 
 in broader masses. But this difference in the character of the 
 colouring seems attributable rather to the nature of the designs 
 which became fashionable in the fourteenth century, than to any 
 definite abstract principle. But however this may be, there is one 
 lesson to be learnt from the ^vorks of tlie fourteenth century, if 
 not from those of the latter part of the thirteenth, which is — that 
 the glazing which chiefly consists of white glass is more favour- 
 able to the effect of window tracery than that wliich consists of 
 a mass of intensely rich colours. For the latter tends to confuse 
 the tracery, unless indeed the direction of the principal lines of 
 tlie glass composition are strongly opposed to the lines of the 
 stonework, in which case there is a suffioient contrast between 
 the stone tracery and the deep-coloured glass to render the 
 former perfectly distinct. Thus the muUions and tracery come 
 out strongly in some of the clearstory windows at Bourges, and 
 in the windows of York Chapter-house, where the glazing is 
 principally white ; but are not so easily made out in the windows 
 of the Sainte-Chapelle at Paris, which are filled with richly 
 coloured glass. On the other hand, the mullions of the southern 
 rose at Chartres, Avliich is likewise filled with richly coloured 
 mosaics, show themselves distinctly — as appears from the diagram 
 I now exhibit. Here the principal lines of the stonework diverge, 
 like rays, from the centre of the window, whilst the principal 
 lines of the glass composition form concentric circles ; the star- 
 like effect of this, and many other rose windows of the thirteenth 
 century (the north rose of Notre-Dame, at Paris, is another 
 example), thus being produced by the 0[)position of two distinct 
 
 r 
 
210 ox THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 designs, — one of whicli, the stone design, appears as if it were 
 laid upon the other. If tliis consideration should lead to the 
 conclusion that glazing principally consisting of white glass is 
 best suited for the windows of buildings in the Decorated style of 
 architecture, there can be little doubt, I apprehend, that the 
 best designs would be those consisting of pattern-work painted 
 on white glass, of w^hich there are numerous and beautiful 
 examples in the Cathedrals of York and Exeter, Merton Chapel, 
 Oxford, and other places, with or without the enrichment of 
 inserted panels, containing groups, or single figures, on stiff- 
 coloured grounds, executed in the simple flat style before 
 mentioned. I would on no account advocate the use of figures 
 and canopies, because the stiff character of the colouring, which 
 does not materially differ from that of the thirteenth centmy, is 
 unfavourable to such a display of light and shade as is necessary 
 to make the canopies seem as if they projected forward. I have 
 heard the flatness of Decorated figures and canopies defended on 
 the score of their resemblance to some of the published outlines 
 of the German engraver Eetch ; but these outlines are only 
 intended for near inspection, by which alone the varying thick- 
 ness of the outline, which produces the effect of light and shade, 
 can be appreciated. At a distance these designs would, of 
 course, be invisible ; or if enlarged in painted glass, as I have 
 also heard recommended, would appear flat and thin — just as a 
 copy of a fourteenth-century monumental brass Avould look if 
 executed in painted glass. 
 
 The change in the nature of the material in 1380, or thereabouts, 
 and the substitution of glass such as we see used in the works of 
 the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, for the deep intense tints 
 previously employed, is, like many other points connected with 
 the history of an art, one on which no light has hitherto been 
 thrown. It is but a conjecture that the change was brought about 
 by the glass-makers in Germany. But I think we may conclude, 
 from the fact that glass-painting was becoming more pictorial 
 just before the change in the material, and that it became still 
 more pictorial after it, that the lowering of the different tints in 
 depth was intended to second the efforts of the artist to produce 
 glass pictures in preference to glass mosaics. 
 
 One is tempted to infer the existence of some harmony 
 between the character of the architecture and the delicate tints 
 and silvery tone of the glass of the fifteenth century, from their 
 having been so long associated together. And, in one respect, 
 the glass is no doubt well suited to the architecture ; for even 
 
TO VAlUOrS STYLKS OF AllCIIlTKCTUHF. 211 
 
 tlie most elaborately painted window is, owing to the lightness 
 of its hues, never confused with the stonework. And ex};erience 
 has abundantly shown that the effective pictures of the sixteenth 
 century harmonize as well witli the architecture of the fifteenth 
 as the imperfect productions of that period. There is no apparent 
 difference between the architecture of the windows of Fairford 
 Church, Gloucestershire, and that of the windows of churches 
 (piite half a century earlier ; and yet the sixteenth-century glass, 
 with which these windows are filled, is in perfect harmony with 
 the character of the building. I therefore think that windows 
 for fifteenth-century buildings should be designed on the model 
 of the glass-paintings of the sixteenth century ; in wdiich case 
 the artist might consistently employ canopies, if he thought 
 proper. The most splendid Gothic canopies in glass that I have 
 overseen, are in two of the windows of Munich Cathedral ; one is 
 dated in 1503. These canopies are so painted as to appear like 
 what they profess to be — hollow niches. 
 
 As a general rule it appears more satisfactory that one scale 
 of figures should be preserved throughout a window, than thai 
 the size of the figures should be regulated by the sizes of the 
 lights they occupy ; as in most Gothic examples. In the cinque- 
 cento period the uniformity of scale was preserved, not un- 
 frequently, by the employment of angel boys, instead of full- 
 grown figures, to fill the smaller tracery lights, xlt Fairford, 
 and other places, the expedient adopted is the use of demi-figures 
 in the tracery lights. 
 
 In the fifteenth as w^ell as in the sixteenth century it was 
 a not uncommon practice to extend the design of a glass- 
 painting beyond the limits of a single light. In some instances 
 the entire window is filled with a single picture, which is spread 
 over the wdiole opening, independently of the mullions. So 
 great an outcry has how^ever been raised against this practice, 
 that it seems worth while to say a few words in justification of 
 it. In the first place, there is not, I conceive, a greater violation 
 of principle committed in laying as it were the design of per- 
 pendicular tracery-work over the design of a fifteenth-century 
 picture in glass, than is committed in laying the design of a 
 thirteenth-century rose window^ over the design of its glazing. 
 The stonework of the window sustains no injury of effect ; on the 
 contrary, it is rendered more distinct by the opposition of its 
 design to that of the glass. Neither is the glass-painting injured 
 by being cut by the stonework, for, as remarked by a member of 
 this society on a former occasion, the force of imagination is 
 
212 ON THE APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS 
 
 such, that the design may be preserved in all its unity through 
 any number of lights : an observation which, I think, will be 
 admitted to be true by those who have been in the habit of 
 looking at such works with an unbiassed eye. But the practice 
 may be defended on another, and perhaps less questionable, 
 ground— on tlie score of necessity. Our ancestors were in the 
 habit of representing in their windows vast numbers of legendary 
 saints ; but modern practice is in general so opposed to this, as 
 in effect to limit the choice of the artist to representations of 
 our Saviour, the four Evangelists, the twelve Apostles, occa- 
 sionally the Virgin Mary, and some of the Prophets and 
 Patriarchs. I believe that I am speaking within compass when 
 I say that his choice does not extend beyond three dozen single 
 figures. Consequently monotony is inevitable, unless recourse 
 is had to groups of figures. Here indeed the means of selection 
 is almost unlimited. Flaxman declares (Works, p. 331) that it 
 may be affirmed, " without danger of exaggeration, that many 
 hundred subjects are to be found in the sacred writings, which, 
 being ably designed, would be new to the beholder." But in 
 order to ensure a sufficient scale for the figures, the group must 
 not unfrequently be extended beyond the limits of a single 
 light. Upon the ground of necessity, therefore, we may well 
 justify the carrying a glass-picture across a window, to a certain 
 extent irrespective of the nmllions. And 1 should perhaps add, 
 that when we consider that painted windows by their size might 
 not unfrequently offer a field -for the talents of the historic 
 painter, it seems unadvisable to scare artists from it by imposing- 
 conditions which were often broken through by the mediaeval 
 painters themselves. 
 
 In conclusion, I will repeat what I stated at the outset, that I 
 claim no infallibility for any of the views I have advanced. 
 I am conscious of having approached delicate ground more than 
 once ; especially in the course of my remarks on the sort of 
 glass-paintings best suited for buildings in the classical styles. 
 On this point I consider that I have but raised questions which 
 wiser heads than mine must solve. My object will have been 
 accomplished if I have added but one grain of information to the 
 common stock ; or if I have succeeded in proving that there is 
 no mystery in glass-painting, that it is a branch of the Fine 
 Arts distinguished from others only by certain conditions, and 
 that the same sober rules of criticism equally apply to the pro- 
 ductions of the glass-painter. To take a familiar instance — we 
 sometimes hear it disputed wliether the flesh ought to be 
 
TO VAT^IOUS STYLES OF AlU'IHTECTl^ IMC. 213 
 
 coloured or left white in a p^lass-paintiiip^ ; the opponents ot" 
 tinted flesh uro-in^- the impossibility of imitating nature exactly 
 in this I'espect. The answer is obvious enough. 'J'he whole 
 colouring of a glass-painting is highly conventional, whether it 
 be of the draperies, of the flesh, of the sky, or of any other 
 object; still so long as it does not exceed the limits of con- 
 ventionality — a point to be ascertained only by observation and 
 general opinion — the eye and imagination are satisfied; We 
 should be startled and disgusted at seeing flesh painted green or 
 blue ; but the complacency with which pink or white flesh in 
 a glass-painting is regarded by the generality of mankind is a 
 suflicient proof that neither of those tints contradict nature too 
 violently, and therefore that the artist does not exceed the 
 limits of conventionality in using either white or tinted flesh at 
 liis discretion. 
 
 The wide range of this paper, and the necessity of confining 
 its length within reasonable limits, have of course compelled me 
 to touch on several topics in a very cursory manner; and 
 especially that relating to the actual mode of executing a glass- 
 painting, on which the argument in favour of the mosaic system 
 almost entirely depends. However, as I went into this subject 
 at great length in a little work which I published in 1(S47,' 
 and of which there is a copy in your library, I must refer those 
 to it who are inclined to pursue the matter further. It may 
 seem superfluous to those who have read this book to assure 
 you that there is a perfect consistency between it and such 
 views as I have just expressed ; but, as certain writers are in the 
 habit of taunting me with inconsistency, I may as well state 
 that the only foundation for the charge is this : That, perceiving 
 at the time when that book was written, that modern copies of 
 the thirteenth-century windows, besides being very raw in colour, 
 were, owing to the extreme pellucidness of the glass then in use, 
 thin and poor in effect — the most favourable examples never 
 having a more imposing air than a veneer of an old window 
 might be expected to have — and that the process of antiquating 
 the glass, that is dulling it over with tlie enamel brown in 
 imitation of the effect of age, only produced dulness without 
 imparting depth, I ventured to suggest the adoption of shadows, 
 such as we see in cinquecento work, as well as a broader style of 
 colouring than was used in the mosaics of the thrteenth century. 
 
 ^ ' An Inquiry into the Difference of Style observable in Ancient (xlass- 
 Paiutings, with Hints on Glass Painting, by an Amateur,' p. 2:38 ct seq. 
 
214 APPLICATION OF PAINTED GLASS, ETC. 
 
 as a means of correcting the flimsiness without destroying the 
 brilliancy of the material, and at all events of giving power to 
 the work ; and that, since the manufacture of the twelfth-century 
 glass has been revived, I have advocated a nearer approach to 
 ancient precedents, both in tlie execution of the painting and 
 the method of its colouring. I trust this brief explanation will 
 finally dispose of the charge to which I have alluded ; a charge 
 which never would have been made, any more than the absurd 
 misrepresentation that I have at any time recommended the 
 universal employment of the cinquecento style, details and all, 
 had it not been for those writers' ignorance of the subject on 
 which they professed to write, and their consequent inability to 
 comprehend any argument in relation to it which is founded 
 on general views. To you, gentlemen, I am indebted for the 
 patience with which you have listened to so long and dry a 
 discourse. 
 
ON THE RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN MEDLEVAL 
 AND CLASSICAL ART, AS EXE:\[PLIFIED IN 
 THE GLASS -PAINTINGS OF THE TAVELFTH 
 AND THIRTEENTH CENTURIES. 
 
 Read at the Ordiuary General Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Aichiteets, 
 June l<)th, 1856.) 
 
 T may perhaps be recollected that on a former 
 occasion/ ^vhilst adverting to the harmonious 
 agreement between ancient painted glass and 
 ancient Gothic architecture, I alluded to the 
 resemblance which the glass-paintings, contem- 
 poraneous with the architecture of the twelfth 
 century and early part of the thirteenth, bore to 
 the Antique ; and thus I concluded, i'rom their 
 agreement with the architecture, that we miaht contrive to pro- 
 duce modern glass-paintings equally in keeping with Early Gothic 
 architecture, and superior to the old ones as works of art, if, instead 
 of merely copying these ancient remains, or perhaps barely cor- 
 recting their bad drawing, we should strive to work up to those 
 models of excellence which inspired the earliest Christian artists, 
 and which have been admired, and, I will venture to say, will 
 be admired so long as an appreciation of beauty shall continue 
 to be a faculty of the human mind, although persons may occa- 
 sionally be met with who seem to have been rendered insensible 
 or indifterent to their merit by a too exclusive study of the 
 3Iedia3val art. In the discussion which these remarks occa- 
 sioned, the propriety of illustrating my views by means of a 
 drawing was suggested, and I agreed to resume the subject 
 whenever I was prepared with such a means of explanation. I 
 
 ' See Proceedings of the Institute of British Architects, Session 1853-54, p. 
 21. (P. 207-2U9 of the present volume.) 
 
216 ON THE RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN 
 
 have been prevented from fulfilling my promise earlier, but the 
 delay is not to be regretted, since it has afforded me more time 
 for consideration. Even now I would particularly guard myself 
 against the supposition that the drawing produced pretends to 
 be a perfect exponent of my views. To carry out those views as 
 I desire would require far greater artistic power than I can 
 command ; and therefore I must request you to regard it not by 
 any means as a finished design, but simply as an explanatory 
 diagram. 
 
 The influence which classical antiquity exerted on the arts of 
 the West, principally through Byzantium, has been repeatedly 
 insisted upon, and illustrated by modern writers. In some 
 instances we are almost able to see the very track by which such 
 influence was transmitted ; in others it is impossible to forbear 
 ascribing much to the effect of local remains, the fruit of a 
 Roman occupation ; in either case it is difficult to discriminate 
 between the work of native and foreign artists. Still, however, 
 a common resemblance points to a common origin. A variety 
 of causes may unite to render this resemblance more palpable 
 on some occasions than on others. But the wider the ex- 
 perience, the more positive is the belief in the Byzantine or 
 Greek character of Western art in the twelfth and thirteenth 
 centuries. 
 
 From this influence ancient glass-paintings are not exempt. 
 They are infected by it in the same degree as other specimens 
 of pictorial art. I am sorry I cannot corroborate by docu- 
 mentary evidence the opinion I have formed from the appear- 
 ance of the painted glass. When and where the art of painting 
 upon glass was discovered is still a matter of conjecture. The 
 testimony of the earliest Avriter, Theophilus, by itself only shows 
 that, at the time he wrote, France was, par excellence, the 
 country in which it was practised. He tells his readers that 
 they will find in his book •' all the knowledge that Greece pos- 
 sesses in the kinds and mixtures of colours ; Tuscany in inlaid 
 works, and the various kinds of niello ; Arabia in malleable, 
 fusible, or chased work ; Italy in the various kinds of vases, and 
 the carving, enriched with gold and silver, of gems and ivory ; 
 France in the precious variety of luindoics ; and industrious Ger- 
 many in the delicate workmanship of gold, silver, copper, iron, 
 wood, and stones." The Abbe Texier indeed — the author to 
 whom I have had the most resort, because his inquiries are the 
 most germane to my own pursuits — considers it probable that 
 
medlt:val and classical akt. . 217 
 
 tlie honour of the discovery is due to the Limoges school of 
 artists ;' and tliough his chief reason, the similarity of the process 
 of enamelling- to that of glass-})aintiiig. of its(?lf is entitled to little 
 weight, especially if the opinion be correct that Germany shared 
 with Limoges the manufacture of enamelled ware, the leaning 
 of my mind, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, is 
 in favour of his opinion. Our not finding any specimens of 
 painted glass earlier than the twelfth century or the end of the 
 eleventh, and these nowliere except in France — so far, at least, 
 as I am aware of — affords a presum])tion that earlier specimens 
 never existed, and tliat the commencement of the manufacture 
 was in France. And I have long been of opinion that the glass 
 used in the earliest glass-paintings was made from Greek or 
 Byzantine recipes, on account of its being so similar in texture 
 and colour to the ancient Greek glass. Therefore (without, 
 however, necessarily committing ourselves to the opinion that 
 the art was discovered in France) I think we may safely con- 
 clude that it was discovered in Western Europe by some school 
 of artists under Byzantine influence. Indeed, the very badness 
 of the figure-drawing in the earliest examples, as compared with 
 the excellence of the foliaged ornaments — and which, therefore, 
 cannot be attributed, as in the case of the earliest Enamels, to 
 any peculiar difficulty in the manufacture — is an argument in 
 favour of the discovery being made by a school of artists as yet 
 immature, such as a provincial school might be considered in 
 comparison with that of Byzantium. And by way of accounting 
 for the spread and intensity of Byzantine influence in France, I 
 may mention, on the authority of 31. Texier, that as early as 979 
 a Venetian colony was settled at Limoges, for the purpose of 
 trading with the spices and other commodities of the East, con- 
 veyed from Egypt by way of Marseilles. Mr. Fergusson, in his 
 very useful Handbook,^ corroborates the supposition that it was 
 with Alexandria that the Venetians had their closest connexion, 
 though no doubt, as the great carriers of the Levant, they were, 
 at that time, in frequent communication with Byzantium. To 
 what extent the Venetians imbibed the Byzantine principles of 
 architecture — in some degree modified by their commerce with 
 Alexandria — is seen by a reference to their great church of St. 
 
 ^ See * Essai liistorique et descriptif I'Ouest. 1841, 18-^2. Poictiera. Svo. 
 
 siir les Argentiers et les Kinailleurs de - * The Illustrated Handbook of ArcUi- 
 
 Liinoges, par M. I'Abbe Texier, Cure tecture, by James Fergusson, M.R.LB. A.' 
 
 d'Auriat,' Published in the Me'iuoires 2 vols. Murray. 1855. 
 of the Societe des Antiquaires de 
 
218 ON THE RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN 
 
 Mark (a building remarkable, according to Mr. Fergasson, for 
 being the only real specimen of Byzantine arcliitectnre within 
 the limits of tlie Western Empire) ; and the churches of St. 
 Front Perigueux (the erection of which is ascribed to the Doge 
 Orseolo L, who came to sojourn in France in 978), Souillac, 
 Angouleme, Cahors, Solignac, Fontevrault Abbey, Fleac, St. 
 Hilary of Poictiers, and others, all at no great distance from 
 Limoges, attest, in their general architectural resemblance to 
 St. Mark's, how thoroughly the colony carried with it the taste 
 and arts of the parent state. 
 
 The Byzantine school, thus implanted in France, was during a 
 considerable period continually having its traditions revivified 
 and corrected by the influx of fresh artists and new works of art 
 from the East. Greek artists, it seems, were living there in the 
 thirteenth century ; and as late as 1421 an inhabitant oP Limoges 
 brought with him an artist to carve a resemblance of the Holy 
 Sepulchre, on his return, by way of Venice, from a pilgrimage 
 to Jerusalem. If, then, glass-painting were a French art, having 
 its cradle in or in the neighbourhood of Jimoges, we should 
 expect to find its earliest remains displaying Byzantine features, 
 and, if so, the features more or less strongly developed of the 
 Antique ; and wheresoever the birthplace of the art may have 
 been, I assert that its earlier remains do display those features. 
 The most careless observer can hardly fail to be struck with 
 the resemblance between the glass-paintings of towards the 
 middle of the twelfth century,, and the ilhiminations in the con- 
 temporary Greek MSS., or with the frequent recurrence in them 
 of Greek ornaments ; and the same general character may be 
 traced in glass-paintings until quite the middle of the second 
 half of the thirteenth century, when it gradually died out, before 
 the increasing influence of a new style, of which the sculptures 
 ill the choir of Lincoln, to which Mr. Cockerell has directed our 
 attention,' may be said to be an early and a favourable type. 
 But the glass-paintings which, on the whole, most closely re- 
 semble the antique are those which were executed between 
 1170 and 1240, or thereabouts. I am not seeking to deny that 
 these Avorks were executed by native artists either in France or 
 England ; but I cannot ascribe, as some have done, their greater 
 freedom and closer likeness to good models, merely to the pro- 
 gressive improvement of a school. It seems more reascnable to 
 suppose that the change w^as in great measure caused by the 
 
 ' Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Lincoln, 1848. 
 
MEDLEYAL AND CLASSICAL AKT. 219 
 
 influx of Greek artists, and greater aptitude on the jiart of their 
 })U})ils to profit by instruction. The draperies, instead of beiiifj; 
 tightly wrapped ahout the limbs, and scanty in their proportions, 
 as in the earlier examples, are more elegant and flowing, re- 
 minding one of the voluminous draperies of the Antique, which 
 they resemble not only in the set, l)ut the very form of the folds, 
 betokening a material thin in texture, and, from its pliancy, 
 allowing the action of the limbs to be easily seen beneath it. 
 The heads, too, more nearly resemble the Antique in their con- 
 tour. In one of the windows of Canterbury Cathedral, erected 
 shortly after the Are in 1174 (the second window from the west, 
 in the north aisle of the choir), are some heads which might 
 have been copied from the old Eoman. There are some similar 
 ones at Lincoln, in glass, of the same date as that of the north 
 rose, and now worked into it, though not belonging to it. There 
 is also a strong resemblance to the x\ntique in the fashion of the 
 garments. It is well known that the Romans had in great mea- 
 sure ceased to be the gens togata (Romanes rerum dominos, 
 gentemque togatam) even in the reign of the Emperor Augustus. 
 The Lacerna, a cloak fastened on one slioulder with a clasj), and 
 sometimes furnished with a hood, originally borrowed from the 
 army, became, on account of its greater convenience, worn with 
 the Tunic, as the ordinary dress of the Roman citizen ; and, by 
 degrees, the Toga was reserved for state occasions. After the 
 removal of the seat of empire to Constantinople, a variety of 
 additional dresses were used, many of them of Greek origin ; 
 the more stately of which were, with its usual tact, ai>propriated 
 by the Church as it gathered power, and which are the founda- 
 tion of the Mass vestments of the Roman clergy at this day. 
 This has been clearly demonstrated by the learned Krazer,^ 
 whose accuracy, though it may have been painful to the High 
 Churchmen, as showing the Pagan origin of some of the most 
 sacred things, has never been impugned. Some of these dresses 
 were, moreover, adopted in their coui-ts by the barbarian con- 
 querors of the Roman empire, and thus were handed down to 
 later times. The Dalmatic, in which the effigy of King John in 
 Worcester Cathedral is clothed, is an instance, and the modern 
 Peers' state-robe is another. The most popular dress amongst 
 those nations who possessed themselves of the territories of the 
 Emj)ire, no doubt, was the Tunic, with or without the Lacerna, 
 or a shorter cloak used by the private legionaries, called the 
 
 - Krazer »ie Liiurgii*. Augsburg, 17X6. 
 
220 ON THE RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN 
 
 Sagiim ; and this dress, with slight raodificatioiis, appears to 
 have been in actual use in the thirteenth century. The 
 Medisevals almost invariably adopted the Tunic with long 
 sleeves in preference to that with short sleeves, which was the 
 one usually worn by the Eomans ; and instead of the Braccae 
 and buskins of antiquity, they clothed the nether man in long 
 hose, over which they used shoes or long boots. So that, witii 
 the exception of the legs and arms being clothed, there is but 
 little difference between an ordinary thirteenth-century figure 
 copied from glass, and a figure taken from tlie Arch of Titus or 
 Trajan's Column. Tlie long Tunic reaching to the feet, so com- 
 mon in the glass-paintings of the thirteenth century, also had 
 its prototype in Imperial Kome. The figures on the Arch of 
 Titus show that it was at that time often worn beneath the 
 Toga. Indeed, startling as it may appear, representations of 
 the Toga itself are to be found in pictures on glass of the 
 thirteenth century ; and I have little doubt in my own mind 
 that the mantle which, carelessly thrown over the long Tunic, 
 constituted the conventional dress of prophets and of saints, not 
 being ecclesiastics, throughout the middle ages, was, in fact, but 
 a corruption of the Toga. 
 
 With regard to the Ornament, it is easy by means of the 
 carved ivories (of which I perceive a Catalogue by the Arundel 
 Society has just been presented to this Institute) to trace the 
 transition from tlie Classical to that used in the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries. It is so plain that the Mediaeval artists 
 borrowed their ideas from the Antique, which being so purely 
 architectural and conventional is on that account I think 
 the finest oi all ornament, that I shall not urge the matter 
 further. Indeed, the thing speaks for itself. I shall therefore 
 proceed without further delay to deduce a few practical hints 
 from the facts I luive stated. 
 
 The question that naturally arises is, if glass-paintings, whose 
 drawing so much resembles the Antique, completely harmonize 
 with the buildings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, would 
 not other glass-paintings equally harmonize with such buildings, 
 whose drawing should more exactly resemble the Antique in 
 point of excellence ? I say in point of excellence, for I totally 
 disclaim any intention of recommending the substitution of 
 copies of Classical draperies or ornaments for Mediaeval ones, 
 or exchanging the individual character, and strictly human, as 
 opposed to God-like, expression of the countenance, which dis- 
 tinguish Christian art, for the more generalized and conventional 
 
MEDIEVAL AND CLASSICAL ART. 221 
 
 treatment of the Antique. I wish to see the Christian sentiment 
 elevated but not obliterated by a study of tlie Antique, and tlie 
 ]\[edijrval drapery drawn as the ]\Iediieval artist would have 
 drawn it, liad he possessed the power of the Greek. 
 
 I am persuaded tliat, if the same tone of colour which we see 
 in ancient ^lass-paintings of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries 
 be adopted, all archaeologijcal requirements will be satisfied by 
 adln4-ing to the costume of the period and general form of orna- 
 ment, and preserving the individuality and character of the 
 heads. Thus the attitudes of the figures, the arrangement of 
 the groups, and general cast of the features, might be taken as 
 closely as possible from the Antique, whilst the draperies should 
 be treated as being thin in texture, voluminous, accommodated 
 to the limbs, and moulded into deep simple folds. I believe 
 that works executed upon this principle would often be taken 
 for old ones of very superior quality. No doubt to achieve such 
 works would require far higher artistic power than is generally 
 now employed in glass-painting, and a vast deal more time to be 
 bestowed on their preparation than is now required, all which 
 would tend to increase their cost. But having confidence in 
 the common sense of the country, I believe, if the matter were 
 properly presented to their minds, that most patrons of glass- 
 painting would prefer possessing one Picture window in a 
 church, exhibiting a decent display of art, all the other windows 
 being filled with good Pattern glass-paintings, instead of being 
 content as now with having every window filled with the veriest 
 trash under the denomination of Pictures. The present want of 
 artists to execute such works is no argument against the system, 
 since we may be sure that plenty of artists would come forward 
 as soon as they ascertained that their services were required. If 
 the system is correct, there can be no insuperable difficulty in 
 working it out. 
 
XL 
 
 ON THE GLAZING OF THE NOKTH KOSE WINDOW 
 OF LINCOLN CATHEDKAL. 
 
 (From the Archseological Journal, vol. xiv. 1857.) 
 
 HERE is no task more agreeable to the archito- 
 logist than that of recording the preservation of 
 an interesting relic of ancient art. The painted 
 glass in the North Rose of Lincoln Cathedral, 
 which was observed to be in an insecure state dur- 
 ing the Institute's visit to Lincoln in 1848, Avas, 
 in the course of the year before last, releaded, and 
 the stonework in which it is placed reset, at the 
 expense of the dean and chapter. It is impossible to speak too 
 highly of the substantial character of the repair ; and as no 
 "restoration" of the glass was attempted, what remains of the 
 original glazing is likely to continue for many generations a 
 trustworthy witness to the state of the arts at the time of its 
 execution. 
 
 Having had an opportunity, during the repairs, of more closely 
 examining the glass than I had before been able to do, and 
 finding that my description of it in the Lincoln volume of the 
 Institute's proceedings was in some respects inaccurate, I am 
 induced to subjoin the following amended description, in which 
 I have again availed myself of the diagram that illustrated my 
 former statement. 
 
 No. 1. Tliis picture is in a very mutilated state. It repre- 
 sents Christ. The head is youthful, but of inferior execution to 
 the head of the figure in No. 16. It is adorned with a yellow 
 nimbus, bearing a white cross. What remains of the figure is 
 clothed in a red robe, and a white under-garment having yellow 
 cuffs. The right hand is raised in benediction ; it exhibits no 
 stigma. The left hand is destroyed ; it once held a book, which 
 still remains. One foot is perfect ; it exhibits no stigma. The 
 body of the figure, with the exception of a small fragment of 
 the white dress, is destroyed. The flesh-colour of the figure is 
 
NORTH UOSE WINDOW OF LINCOI.N CATIIKDHAL. '22.'^ 
 
 very dvv\), almost })iirpl(\ as is tlic ilcsli-coloni' of soveral of the 
 other ligures. 
 
 No. 2 represents three tigun^s seated in altitncles of atlorati(jn, 
 and looking towards No. 1. The first figure of the group from 
 the centre of tln^ window wears a mitre. 
 
 No. 3. A similar subject. The group consists of a female and 
 two male figures. 
 
 No. 4. A similar subject. The group consists of three male 
 lignres, the first of which is mitred. 
 
 No. 5. This picture is much mutilated. The group consists 
 of three lignres seated like the otliers. The heads are smaller 
 than those of the rest of the figures, and are apparently in- 
 sertions. 
 
 No. G represents a similar subject, consisting of two male 
 figures jind one female. 
 
 No. 7. A similar subject, consisting of three figures. Tlie last 
 of the gnjup has the head of a moidv ; but this is an insertion. 
 
224 ON THE GLAZING OF THE 
 
 No. 8. This picture is much mutilated. One figure only of 
 the group remains. Part of a " Jesse " is inserted. 
 
 No. 9. A similar subject. The group consists of three male 
 figures. 
 
 No. 10. A similar subject. 
 
 Nos. 11, &c. Eacli of these seven compartments is filled with 
 painted glass collected from other windows, and mostly of a 
 date somewhat earlier than that of the original glazing of the 
 Kose. The subject of one of the paintings is the legend of St. 
 Gregory. 
 
 Nos. 12, &c. Two of these four compartments contain each 
 the figure of an angel swinging a thurible ; the remains of a 
 similar figure occupy the third compartment ; the figure of the 
 fourth compartment is lost. 
 
 No. 13. Each of these eight compartments contains, or did 
 contain, a small four-leaved ornament in a circle. 
 
 No. 14. Each of these sixteen compartments contains, or did 
 contain, a white star of six wavy points, on a red ground. 
 
 No. 15. Each of these sixteen compartments contains, or did 
 contain, a red star of six w^avy points, on a blue ground. 
 
 No. IG represents Christ sitting on a rainbow. There is a 
 candle on each side of his seat. The head is youthful, is bearded, 
 and adorned with a red nimbus bearing a Avhite cross. The 
 figure is draped in white and purple. The stigmata are shown 
 in both the hands and the side, but not in the feet. The picture 
 is enclosed in a quatrefoiled frame, or border, composed of two 
 bands, the innermost purple, the outermost white, at the angles 
 of which are the Evangelistic symbols, thus arranged : the 
 angel and eagle at top, the lion and bull beneath. None of 
 these symbols is nimbed. A symbolic disposition of colour, such 
 as is partially adopted in this design, is of rare occurrence in 
 painted glass. 
 
 ' No. 17 represents two angels supporting the Cross, in- 
 scribed, — IHC NAZAEENVS. 
 
 No. 18 represents two angels carrying the Spear ; the head 
 of which is formed of a piece of ruby glass, imperfectly coloured, 
 and appearing as if it were white, with a trifling smear of red. 
 
 No. 19. Two angels, one carrying the three Nails and the 
 Napkin, the other a thurible. 
 
 No. 20. Two angels, one bearing the Crown of Thorns, the 
 other a thurible. 
 
 No. 21. St. Peter with the Keys, preceding five other figures, 
 three of which besides St. Peter are nimbed. One of the figures 
 
NORTH ROSE WINDOW OF LINX'OLN CATHEDKAL. 225 
 
 is tliat of a female seated and crowned, but not ninibed. The 
 rest are standiii;::. 
 
 No. 22. Seven figures seated. 
 
 No. 23. Two angels sounding the trumpets. 
 
 No. 24. A similar subject. 
 
 No. 25. Part of the general Resurrection ; tlio subject repre- 
 sents the dead rising from their coffins. 
 
 No. 2G. Tliis picture is an insertion ; it represents Adam 
 digging, and Eve spinning. In the centre are the remains of a 
 tall figure, or angel. The glass seems somewhat later than the 
 original glazing of the Hose. 
 
 Nos. 27, 28, 29. Tliese pictures are clearly insertions. Each 
 represents a bishop seated, giving the benediction. The glass 
 seems somewhat later than the original glazing of the Eose. 
 
 Nos. 30, 31. These pictures also are insertions. Each repre- 
 sents an archbishop seated, giving the benediction. The glass is 
 of the same date as the last tln-ee subjects. 
 
 Amongst the fragments inserted in the North Rose are some 
 trifling remains of the original glazing of the choir windows, 
 which glass appears to be of the time of Edward I. 
 
 From the above account it appears that the intention of the 
 designer of tlie North Rose was, to represent in the central part 
 of the window the Kingdom of Heaven, under the type of Clu'ist 
 seated in glory amidst the blessed (many of these figures are 
 nimbed) ; and to represent in the outer series of circles the Day 
 of Judgment. The circle, No. 26, doubtless contained originally 
 a similar subject to that in No. 25. And the remaining five 
 vacant circles, Nos. 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31, were in all proba- 
 bility occupied with the Resurrection, and its usual incidents, 
 the rescuing of the Good, and the abandonment of the Bad to 
 the Infernal Powers. The raode of describing a connected story 
 by means of representations of its incidents arranged in sym- 
 metrical order, so common in the medallion windows of ihe 
 twelfth and thirteenth centuries, had its origin in remote anti- 
 quity. It is indicated in some of the Assyrian sculptures in the 
 British Museum. 
 
 The original glazing of the North Rose consistently with its 
 character would admit of a date being assigned to it as early as 
 the end of the twelfth or beginning of the thirteenth century ; 
 which, I believe, coincides very nearly with the date generally 
 attributed to the stone-work. And it is on the whole a valuable 
 specimen of the art of the period, although possessing nothing 
 besides its general design which calls for particular notice. The 
 
226 ON THE GLAZING OF THE 
 
 colours of the glass are very fine, being rich and brilliant, and 
 low in tone, as compared with those of ordinary modern glazing. 
 The blue, which is not so pure, and more resembles a neutral- 
 ised purple than that commonly employed in the twelfth century, 
 occasionally exhibits narrow streaks of red; by no means an 
 unusual occurrence in thirteenth-century blue glass, denoting 
 the presence of copper used to correct the rosy hue of the cobalt, 
 some of which has unintentionally been converted into ruby 
 glass. The white glass is of a sea-green tint, and the yellow 
 (a pot-metal) is strongly impregnated with blue, the effect of 
 the deoxidising influence of the carbon of the wood-ash used as 
 an alkali, and of the smoke of the furnace, upon the iron con- 
 tained in the sand, and upon the wood-ash, the constituents of 
 the glass. Much of the ruby is very streaky and uneven in 
 tint ; some pieces indeed when seen near are only like pieces of 
 white glass streaked here and there with ruby ; although, owing 
 to the intermixture of the rays of light, when seen from the floor 
 of the transept, they appear as if they were of an uniform light 
 red colour. Such of the ruby glass as has been painted upon, 
 and therefore burnt in the glass-painter's furnace for the purpose 
 of fixing the enamel — for instance, that used in the draperies — is 
 usually more uniform in tint, and has a thinner coating of colour- 
 ing matter than that used in the unpainted grounds : a circum- 
 stance which may often be remarked in glass-paintings of the 
 twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and which perhaps may be 
 accounted for in the following manner. It has been proved by 
 experiments that the ruby colour is produced in glass by adding 
 to the materials of white glass copper in a state of protoxide, 
 along with oxide of tin, and other substances having a tendency 
 to deprive the copper of its oxygen, as well as oxide of iron ; 
 and recent researches conducted by my friend, Mr. Clarke, have 
 gone far to establish the fact, long since suspected by chemists, 
 that the red colour is due to the presence of copper in the 
 metallic state, very finely divided.^ But whether it is metallic 
 copper, or a precipitate of a suboxide of copper, which produces 
 the ruby (the protoxide of copper only imparts a green colour), 
 it is evident from inspecting a piece of streaky ruby glass that 
 its colouring matter lies in several parallel planes separated from 
 
 ^ That metallic gold in a finely divided Institution,' vol. ii. p. 310. Glass 
 
 state will produce a red colour when coloured with gold is more pink in hue 
 
 held in a transparent medium, has been than that coloured red with copper, 
 
 sliown by Professor Faraday's experi- The Railway night-danger signal is gene 
 
 meuts. See ' Proceedings of the Royal rally constructed with the gold ruby. 
 
NORTH ROSE WINDOW OF LINCOLN CATHEDRAL. 227 
 
 vi\L'\i otli(>r by pvonisli oi* y('llo\vi>li white ^^lass,' und Ibi-ins thin 
 strata of an elongated cliaracter, varving in breadtli from an 
 inch or more to a mere thread ; and that the streaky appearance 
 is owing to the coloured lines in one plane lying in a different 
 direction from the coloured lines in another plane, the complexity 
 of the streaks being in proportion to the numb^'r of strata and 
 non-coincidence of lines of colour. This may be accounted for 
 by supposing tliat the red colour occurs when the oxide of iron, 
 taking the place of the suboxide of copper, or metallic copper, 
 l)recipitates the latter ; and that, as this precij)itation is irregular, 
 the colour also is irregular ; and that the mechanical action 
 of blowing the glass into sheets causes these irregularities to 
 take a streaky form, tlie more complicated in proportion to the 
 number of planes in which the precipitation takes place, and the 
 extent to which the soft glass becomes twisted in the operation. 
 The precipitation of the coi)per by the iron depends upon a pro- 
 portion of materials in the glass, the amount of heat to which it 
 is subjected, and apparently to other causes with which we are 
 not yet acquainted. 
 
 In general, the greater the length of time to which the glass 
 is exposed to heat, the more the precipitation takes place, and 
 the more fully is the glass coloured.^ Those sheets of glass 
 which in the manufacture show the least traces of colour, will 
 therefore, in general, endure the greatest quantity of heat with- 
 out becoming too dark. The thinner also the coating of 
 coloured glass is, cceteris paribus, the less intense the colour will 
 be.^ It is probable that the experience of these consequences 
 led the ancient glass-painters to select for the pm-pose of being 
 painted and burnt such portions of the ruby-glass as were ascer- 
 tained to have the thinnest ruby coating, in wdiich no other 
 change might in general be apprehended than the conversion 
 of streaky ruby into smooth ruby, and a general though unim- 
 portant increase in the depth of colour. During the twelfth 
 
 ' Diagrams of ruby glass, seen in ^ The thinly -coated ruby of the 
 
 section, in which the laminje of colour twelfth and thirteenth centuries, before 
 
 are shown, are given in the ' Imjuiry it is burnt, is streaky in colour, and its 
 
 into the Difference of Style observable ruby coating when seen \vith the micro- 
 
 in Ancient Glass Paintings ; by an scope is found to be filled with thin 
 
 Amateur,' p. 22. lamina; of red, like that of the thickly- 
 
 " Sometimes the same process will coated ruby. The streakiness of the 
 
 convert the red gla.ss into white glass ; thickly-coated ruby is, however, rather 
 
 but this is perfectly consistent with more strongly marked thim that of the 
 
 what is stated in the text. thinly-coated ruby. 
 
 (i 2 
 
228 ON THE GLAZING OF THE 
 
 and thirteenth centuries, and in England until about the last 
 quarter of the fourteenth, glass thinly coated with ruby is com- 
 paratively rare ; the great majority of specimens of ruby having 
 a ruby coating of a depth varying from one-fourth to one-half 
 of the thickness of the entire sheet.^ And there can be little 
 doubt that the thinly coated ruby of this period, the colouring 
 matter of which is about the thickness of a sheet of stout writinof 
 paper, was produced by some accident in the manufacture. 
 
 The smooth ruby which superseded the streaky in England 
 about 1370, and in Germany a good deal earlier in that century, 
 has a coating of colouring matter not thicker than a sheet of 
 writing paper, which is almost always entirely converted into 
 ruby in the first instance. This glass, therefore, either is not 
 altered at all in colour, or undergoes but a very slight increase 
 in depth of colour on being burnt ; and for this reason the change 
 in the manufacture was probably at the time considered as an 
 improvement by the English glass-painters, who were then be- 
 ginning to treat paintings on glass less as mosaics, and more 
 like pictures. If they had continued to practise the older system 
 of designing, they would have found the new material productive 
 of a flatter and tamer effect than the old streaky ruby. But the 
 change in the manufacture of the material exactly suited the 
 change in the style of glass-painting which, in England, took 
 place nearly contemporaneously with it. Some of the German 
 glass-paintings of the first half of the fourteenth century, and 
 most modern glass-paintings which affect so early a style, may 
 be referred to as illustrating the truth of the above remark. 
 
 The actual painting of the glass in the North Kose, when 
 compared with that of contemporary specimens, must be con- 
 sidered to be rather careless than otherwise. Nevertheless, it 
 is impossible not to recognise in the drawing throughout, but 
 especially in the draperies, the influence of Greek art, though 
 not quite to the extent to which this is shown in the glass-paint- 
 ings generally of the latter part of the twelfth century, parti- 
 cularly in those which, like some examples at Canterbury, may 
 be considered to be of French workmanship. It would be un- 
 reasonable to suppose that the resemblance between ancient 
 works in glass and the remains of classical art is accidental. As 
 Gothic architecture originated in a style borrowed from the 
 
 ^ It is to be remembered that ''ruby ruby, applied during its m;mufacture. 
 
 is a "coated glass," i.e. glass Such glass is not coloured by the glass- 
 
 which consists of a sheet of white glass painter, 
 coloured on one side with a coating of •- • -^ 
 
NORTH ROSE WINDOW OF [.IXCOLN CATIIKDIJAL. 229 
 
 Koman, and worked out l)y Greek or Byzantine architects, and 
 that of tlie eleventli, twelfth, and early part of the thirteenth 
 centuries, is evidently an exotic, tlie native of a southern climate, 
 we might naturally expect to meet with the same Greek feeling 
 in all other decorations as is so abundantly displayed in the 
 sculpture of this period. It is probably to a connection with 13yzan- 
 tine art that the glass-painters of the twelfth century owe their 
 superiority over those of the fourteenth ; or, indeed, of any other 
 time than the sixteenth. For through such connexion they 
 could feel, although imperfectly, the influence of that standard 
 of ideal perfection on which the art of the Greeks had the ad- 
 vantage of being founded. The closeness of the connection of 
 these early artists with Byzantine art, and consequently the 
 more immediate influence of the latter on them, will be easily 
 explained, if, as there is reason to believe, France, and Limoges 
 in particular, the ascertained abode of Greek artists, and a 
 place in direct communication, through Marseilles and Alex- 
 andria, with Byzantium and the East, was the cradle of glass- 
 painting ; although the excellence of these glass-painters may 
 be ^mrtly due to the vigour of race. But whether the connection 
 of glass-painting with Byzantine art arose in the manner just 
 indicated or not, or whether it was more or less direct, we may 
 conclude that if these artists had had under their eyes that 
 standard of excellence which is the foundation of Greek art, at 
 however debased a period, instead of being able only dindv to 
 perceive it through the corruptions of tradition, they might, in 
 point of drawing, have anticipated the artistic triumphs of the 
 fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Their works in glass, altliough 
 not altogetlier free from the stiffness and severe formality of 
 Byzantine art, in general exhibit a strong feeling for nature; 
 but the nature these artists affected, — doubtless under the in- 
 fluence of their traditions, — was not a common and imperfect 
 nature, like that represented in the subsequent works of the 
 middle ages, but a noble, refined, and elevated nature, such as 
 is displayed in the antique Koman bas-reliefs,^ and again, in 
 those great woiks of the Kenaissance, which the discovery and 
 direct study of these antiques so strongly promoted. 
 
 Considerations such as these are the best answer to the in- 
 
 ^ Seethe plates, 'Admiranda Roma- latter quality wliich probably rendered 
 
 narum Antiquitatum,' by Jacobus de it more useful to the masters of the 
 
 Rubeis. The Roman sculpture, with sixteenth century than the purest Greek 
 
 much of the beauty of the Greek, is less sculpture would have been. 
 ideal and more natural. It was this 
 
230 NORTH ROSE WINDOW OF LINCOLN CATHEDRAL. 
 
 sensate outcry which has been raised against tlie employment, in 
 the service of our reformed religion, of anything in the least 
 partaking of the character of " Pagan," i. e. classic art, an out- 
 cry the less respectable wlien we know that those who make it 
 the loudest are at the same time the most eager to palliate the 
 many real paganisms which have been adopted by the Komish 
 CI lurch, some of which are by no means so innocent in their 
 consequences as the denounced paganism of artistic truth and 
 beauty. If we recognise the beneficial effect of possessing a 
 standard of excellence in the perfection and freshness of the 
 works of the Kenaissance, which seem like the creations of yester- 
 day, since, being wholly devoid of quaintness, they address us 
 in the language of oin: own sympathies, — of our own modes of 
 thought; common sense will suggest the wisdom of referring to 
 such a standard in modern works, instead of, and in our own 
 case without the excuse of necessity, continuing to flounder on, 
 as in the middle ages, unassisted by such a guide. It is possible 
 that this course mioht lead to the abandonment of the idea that 
 nothing but that lowest of arts, the meagre Gothic of the nine- 
 teenth century,^ is fit for the purposes of our Church ; but we 
 may console ourselves with the assurance that the extinction of 
 the notion would be followed by the erection of buildings better 
 suited to our ritual, to the character of our nation, and practical 
 spirit of the age in which we live, as well as by the advancement 
 of sound principles in art. 
 
 ^ Far be it from me to disparage any and enhances, but whose defects it 
 attempt to improve our national archi- avoids ; and which seems to require no- 
 tecture ; but although we may criticise thing but fine handling to become a 
 the Palladian style, it by no means truly noble style, in all respects w^orthy 
 follows that we ought to set \ip the of, and siiited to, the nineteenth century. 
 Gothic as infallible. Any scheme, in- Although yet in its infancy, and although 
 deed, for removing us from the art of but little pains seem hitherto to have 
 the classic epochs is preposterous. No been taken with it, its productions, by 
 architectutal style can ever be a real tiieir symmetry, simplicity, and gran- 
 living style which does not reflect the deur, already often put to shame our 
 spirit of its age, and no style can reflect most studied modern ecclesiastical edi- 
 the spirit of this age, which is at once fices. They are, moreover, in entire 
 the most powerful and refined age the harmony with other works admitted to 
 world has yet seen, except it be capable be embodiments of the spirit of the ago, 
 of great breadth, simplicity, and refine- such as our ships, our machinery, our 
 ment ; in all which qualities the Gothic bridges, &c. And the spirit in which 
 style is notoriously deficient. It is im- they are conceived seems nearly allied 
 possible not to see that the civil en i- to those broad and comprehensive views 
 neers are the real architects of the day, wliich characterise our times, and which, 
 and that they are silently developing a by contrast, render the narrow-minded 
 new and original style, founded on the subtleties of tlie medieeval era the more 
 old Roman, whose excellences it retains contemptible. 
 
PLATE VII 
 
 Charles Winston, del. Philip DelamoUe Litho Vincent brooks. 
 
 E. WINDOW BUSHBURY CH U RCH , STA F F R D5H I RE. 
 
XIL 
 A LECTURE OX GLASS-PALXTIXa. 
 
 (Delivered before the Working Man's Association at Lichfield, 1859.) 
 
 CTHrapy ^ ^^^^ present occasion I shall not attempt more 
 i^"^ "^i than to give a short and popular account of a 
 curious and beautiful art— that of painting upon 
 glass — not indeed from any unwillingness to go 
 more fully into the subject, but from a conviction 
 that it would be a wearisome and unprofitable 
 task to bring forward a multitude of minute 
 details, very proper for the due understanding of 
 the matter, but which could not be fully apprehended in the 
 short time at our disposal this evening, even if I were able to 
 illustrate them by drawings, which I do not possess, and even if 
 the neighbourhood aftbrded sj^ecimens of glass-painting of various 
 dates with which you could be familiar, and to which I could 
 refer in explanation. With the exception of the beautiful glass 
 in the Cathedral choir, which is all of one period, there is no 
 ancient glass in our immediate neighbourhood to which I can 
 refer; so that I must content myself with an imperfect state- 
 ment, and consider myself fortunate if I can contrive to add 
 some trifle to the general stock of information, or suggest some 
 idea which may not have already occurred. 
 
 By a glass-painting I mean a painting composed of glass or 
 vitreous pastes, because no other materials will long withstand 
 the action of the atmosphere; therefore I shall say nothing 
 about pictures on glass, where the painting, or a good part of it, 
 consists of ordinary colours mixed with varnish or other tenacious 
 material, and which colours must peel off the glass as soon as the 
 vaniish or gum loses its tenacity, which it usually does in a few 
 years. 
 
 A true glass-painting can only be eflected by means of fire. 
 Its colours must either be composed of coloured glass — that is, 
 of pieces of glass coloured in their manufar-ture by the glass- 
 maker, and not by the glass-painter — or must be imparted by 
 
232 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 the glass-painter, by means of stains and enamel colours ; and 
 the shadows and pencilling of the picture must be painted by the 
 glass-painter with enamel colour. And in order to cause the 
 stain to be absorbed by the glass, and the enamel colour to be 
 firmly attached to it, it is necessary to expose the glass to a red 
 heat in a small furnace or muffle : this is done by the glass- 
 painter, and is called burning the glass. 
 
 We often hear it remarked that such a glass-painter's colours 
 are better or lighter than another's, that glass colours fade, that 
 colours are burnt in, and the like expressions, implying that the 
 glass-painter has something to do with the colouring of the glass. 
 This, however, at the present time, in this country, is true only 
 to a limited extent. The glass-painter can indeed, as I have 
 stated, colour a piece of white glass yellow, by means of a stain, 
 and impart many other tints to it by the use of enamel colours. 
 But the employment of enamel colours to colour glass is now in 
 England pretty much gone out of fashion, though still practised 
 to a considerable extent on the continent. The ordinary method 
 of glass-painting in England, at the present time, is to use for 
 the coloured parts of the design glass coloured in its manufacture 
 (staining such parts yellow as may be requisite), and to employ 
 only one enamel colour — an enamel brown — for painting the 
 shadows and pencilling the picture upon the glass, and not other- 
 wise for the purpose of colouring it ; so that, under this system, 
 the glass-painter has little or nothing to do with the colouring 
 of the glass. He buys the coloured glass as well as the white 
 glass in the market, w^hich is open to all alike, and his business 
 consists in arranging and shaping the various pieces so as to 
 correspond with the different colours of his design, in the manner 
 of a coarse mosaic; in painting these pieces of glass with the 
 enamel brown, so as to represent the shadows and pencilling of 
 the design ; in applying the yellow stain where necessary ; in 
 burning the glass to fix the enamel brown and cause the stain to 
 operate ; and, finally, in connecting the various pieces of glass 
 together with lead work ready to be put up in the window. 
 
 The enamel brown, like any other enamel colour, consists of 
 colouring matter, mixed with pulverised glass, called fiux or 
 enamel ; this flux being of a nature more easily fusible than the 
 glass intended to be coloured melts, whilst the other is only at a 
 red heat, and on the cooling of the furnace hardens and attaches 
 itself, along with the colouring matter enveloped in it, firmly to 
 the glass. 
 
 If the glass is not heated sufficiently to melt the enamrel, or if 
 
A LECTURE OX OLASS-PAINTrXO. *^o/> 
 
 the enamel or flux, when cool, should by natural vicissitudes of 
 temperature expand and contract in a different ratio from that 
 at which the glass which is painted with the enamel colour 
 expands and contracts, the enamel colour will, in process of 
 time, peel or chip off. This incident has given rise to the notion 
 that the colours of a glass-painting are apt to lade : it would be 
 more correct to say that enamel colours are apt to become 
 obliterated in patches. The colours, however, which are ordi- 
 narily employed, that is to say, the colours of coloured glass, 
 never do fade, that I am aware of; the enamel brown may 
 become obliterated, but the colours themselves remain unchanged 
 and last so long as the glass which contains them exists. 
 
 The mode of making glass, whether white or coloured, is very 
 simple and ingenious. To begin with the white : the materials, 
 consisting principally of sand and alkali, are fused together in 
 the glass-house by means of intense and long-continued heat, 
 and the melted matter is formed into sheets of glass in the fol- 
 lowing manner : a workman dips one end of a long hollow iron 
 tube into the pot, and collects upon it a mass of melted glass 
 weighing perhaps nine or ten pounds ; he then blows with his 
 mouth down the tube and expands the mass into a hollow globule, 
 larger and larger, until the sides of the globe are as thin as he 
 intends the sheet of glass to be : when this is done, another work- 
 man approaches v/ith a solid iron rod, called a pint, having a bit 
 of melted glass at one end ; this he applies to the side of the 
 globe opposite the blow-pipe, wliich immediately adheres to the 
 melted glass at the end of the punt. The blow-pipe is then 
 disengaged from the globe, leaving a small round hole in it ; 
 this hole is, by means of the punt, wliich is now firmly attached 
 to the globe, turned to the furnace, the glass is softened by the 
 heat, and the hole is made wider and wider by repeatedly 
 trundling the punt, until at last the whole globe of glass, yielding 
 to the centrifugal impulse, flies open, leaving a circular plain 
 disk, between four and five feet in diameter, attached to tlie 
 punt by its centre. It is speedily disengaged and placed in the 
 annealing oven, where the glass is allowed to cool very gradually, 
 in order to render it less brittle, and when taken out the sheet 
 of glass is ready for sale, being one of those circular tables which 
 may be seen in any glazier's shop, and which has in its centre a 
 lump or hulVs-eije, being the remains of the piece of glass by 
 which the sheet was attached to tlie punt. 
 
 This is one way of making a sheet of glass. There is another, 
 which seems to have been the earliest metliod, and wliich is now 
 
234 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 generally preferred, because it avoids the blemish of the bull's- 
 eye and thickening of the sheet in its centre — defects inseparable 
 from the former process. The globule of glass is blown as before, 
 and a hole made in it opposite to the blow-pipe, without disen- 
 gaging tlie globule from the blow-pipe. This hole is gradually 
 enlarged, to the diameter, perhaps, of a foot or more. A punt, 
 having a cross-iron or a circular piece of glass at the end large 
 enough to embrace this hole, is applied to it ; the blow-pipe is 
 then disengaged, and the hole left by its removal is enlarged like 
 the other, so that the piece of glass assumes the form of a 
 cylinder : it is then disengaged from the punt and annealed. 
 After this the cylinder is cut through one side, heated in a 
 furnace till it is quite soft, and then spread open flat ; when cool, 
 the sheet of glass is ready for use : it is usually oblong. The 
 improved method is to split the cylinder before it is put into 
 the annealing furnace, and to use the annealing furnace as a 
 spreading furnace, by which means the double heating of the 
 glass is avoided. Nearly all the glass used for painting upon is 
 made according to one or other of these methods. 
 
 The coloured glass is made exactly like the white glass (the 
 colouring matter being simply added to the white glass whilst it 
 is in the pot), with but one exception. There is one kind of 
 coloured glass which is not coloured throughout the entire sub- 
 stance of the sheet, but on one side only, the rest of the sheet 
 being white : this glass is called coated glass. For making it two 
 pots of melted matter are required — the one containing coloured 
 glass, the other wJiite glass. The workman dips his blowing-iron 
 first into the coloured pot and collects on it a lump of coloured 
 glass ; he next dips this lump into the white pot and envelops 
 it with a mass of white glass ; he then blows the whole into a 
 globule, which he forms into a sheet precisely as has already 
 been described : of course the sheet, when made, has one side 
 coloured, the other side white. 
 
 Having thus described the nature of a glass-painting and the 
 method of its construction, I propose to give a slight historical 
 sketch of the rise and progress of the art. 
 
 The art of making glass, whether white or coloured, is of 
 enormous antiquity, and it is one of those discoveries which was 
 brought to perfection at a very early period. The early Nine- 
 vite, Egyptian, and Greek white glass, of which there is an 
 abundant collection of specimens in the British Museum, is not 
 so pellucid as that now manufactured, principally owing to our 
 use of absolutely pure soda ; but it is as good and perfect as tlie 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PATXTIXG. 235 
 
 glivss ordinarily employed until about one hundred years ap^o, 
 and the coloured glass is, I think, finer in tint than any that has 
 hitherto been manufactured. I think it is even finer than the 
 old mediaeval glass of the twelfth century, which, of all later 
 specimens, is that which most closely resembles it. 
 
 The ingenuity of the ancients in making ornaments in coloured 
 glass has not been surpassed by the Venetian glass-makers of the 
 sixteenth century, and their work continues hitherto unrivalled. 
 
 ]\[r. Apsley Pellatt has collected, in a little work called ' The 
 Curiosities of Glass-making,' an amount of information respecting 
 the skill of the ancients in making glass, that may be sought in 
 vain in any other book : and to this little publication I would 
 refer those who are anxious to pursue the subject further. 
 
 Yet with all this skill in blowing glass and modelling it ; in 
 excavating vases, like that of Sir Anthony Eothschild which was 
 exhibited at tlie Society of x\rts a few years ago, out of solid 
 blocks of the material ; they do not appear to have hit upon the 
 art of making sheets of glass, fit for the glazing of windows, until 
 a comparatively late period. I believe the oldest example of 
 window-glass known is the specimen preserved in the ]\Iuseum 
 at Naples, consisting of panes let into a bronze lattice, which 
 was found in an apartment of the public baths, disinterred 
 during the excavations amongst the ruins of Pompeii — a city 
 overwhelmed by an eruption of Mount Vesuvius in the fortieth 
 year of our era. 
 
 I myself possess a small fragment of flat white glass, which 
 was found in the ruins of a Koman villa in Kent, that is sup- 
 posed to have been window-glass ; and from the straightness of 
 its selvedge it appears to be part of a sheet made in cylinder, as 
 already described. 
 
 We may safely assume that the invention of window-glass, 
 having once been made, always continued to be practised. 
 There can be no doubt that the windows of the Church of St. 
 So|)hia at Constantinople (now a mosque) were not only glazed 
 with glass, but were even decorated with coloured glass. This 
 is distinctly stated by an ancient Avriter : and the recent 
 examination of this mosque by the architect employed by the 
 Prussian government has brought to light the way in which 
 the glazing was performed. It appears that a stone or marble 
 frame-work was inserted into the window, dividing the opening 
 into little squares, and tiiat each of these scpiares was ra]jb<'tted 
 for the retention of the glass. I do not think that any of the 
 
236 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 glass was found in its original position, but it is easy to conceive 
 how it was held in its place. There is nothing, I believe, to 
 show that this glass was ever painted upon. The glazing may 
 be inferred, from the ancient description, to have been simply a 
 pattern of white and coloured pieces of glass, quite plain, and 
 the pattern must have been a very stiff one. 
 
 At what time the art of painting upon glass was discovered 
 must probably for ever remain unknown. It w^ould be natural 
 to seek for the earliest specimens in Constantinople, which pro- 
 videntially remained the cradle of the arts during the awful and 
 wide-spread desolation occasioned by the overthrow of the 
 mighty Eoman Empire in the West in the fourth, fifth, sixth, 
 and seventh centuries. • But Constantinople has, in its turn, 
 suffered so dreadfully from the scourge of war, that little 
 remains of its early magnificence, most of its great monuments 
 have perished, and the works of art with which they were 
 adorned have perished with them. Nothing, I believe, now 
 remains in Constantinople in the way of ancient glazing, except 
 the coloured windows of some of the mosques, comparatively of 
 late date. But the mode in which they are constructed, though 
 probably of Byzantine origin, is but a modification of the method 
 adopted at St. Sophia. Mr. Burgess, the architect of the 
 Memorial Church at Constantinople, showed me the other day 
 a drawing he had made of one of the windows of the Mosque of 
 Sultan Suleyman at Constantinople, which was erected early in 
 the sixteenth century. From this drawing and his description 
 the glazing appears to be of precisely the same nature as that of 
 a window brought some years ago from Cairo by Mr. Bell, the 
 late Member for Guildford, with which window I have been long 
 familiar. The whole opening of the window is occupied with a 
 pierced framework of plaster, the openings of which form a com- 
 plete and varied pattern. The frame is moulded on the same 
 principle as a common sash-bar, the ribs being worked off to an 
 edge towards the spectator, so as to be deep and strong, and yet 
 present, comparatively, but little impediment to the light. The 
 back of the frame is level and flat, and upon it are attached 
 with cement the little pieces of glass with which the openings 
 are covered ; the pieces of glass being either white or coloured, 
 according to the nature of the design. None of these pieces of 
 glass are painted, yet the plastic nature of the material, and 
 consequent facility of working it, have allowed so many little 
 notches and other irregularities to be produced in the frame as 
 
A LECTURE OX GLASS-PATNTINO. 237 
 
 really to supersede the necessity of paint ; flowers, vases, and the 
 like simple objects, being rej^resented very intelliixibly by the 
 sash-bars alone, and the colonred glass inserted in them. 
 
 One great pecnliarity of the glass employed in these patterns 
 is its extreme thinness, which is less than one sixteenth of an 
 inch. In its colonr it greatly resouibles the earlier specimens ; 
 a resemblance tending to show a common origin. 
 
 The first anthentic account of painted glass that we possess 
 is given in the treatise of Theopliilus. It has been doubted 
 whether this was written in the tenth or twelfth century. I 
 incline to the opinion that assigns the later date. In it the 
 writer minutely describes the method of making the glass, as 
 well as the mode of painting it, and states that France is the 
 country for painted windows. Of the truthfulness of Theophilus 
 I can bear ami)le testimony, having for the last few years assisted 
 some chemical friends in their analytical investigation of the 
 manufacture of ancient glass. In ever)^ instance we have found 
 Theophilus's statements, as to the materials and colouring matter 
 used in glass-making, perfectly correct. Of course we have been 
 able to explain and account for everything which puzzled him. 
 But his recorded observations have proved most trustworthy. 
 There is, therefore, good reason for believing that France was, at 
 a period at least as early as the twelfth centmy, the cradle of 
 glass-painting ; and the probability is that Limoges or its neigh- 
 bourhood was the principal spot at which it was at first practised. 
 The Abbe Texier, in his researches into the early history of 
 enamelling, for which art Limoges was always most famous, has 
 proved that so early as 979 a Venetian colony was settled at 
 Limoges, for the purpose of trading with the spices and other 
 commodities of the East, conveyed thence by way of Alexandria 
 and 3Iarseilles : Alexandria then being the chief port through 
 which the commerce and arts of the East (including those of 
 Constantinople) found their way into the West : and he shows 
 that Greek artists were settled at Limoges in after times. It 
 would not be safe, of course, to jump to the conclusion that 
 glass-painting was necessarily invented by the enamellers ; but 
 I think we may conclude that both arts were of Byzantine 
 origin, and were imported into \\'estern Europe in the way indi- 
 cated. And this supposition derives some strength from the 
 ascertained resemMance between the texture of the twelfth- 
 century glass and that of the antique — a resemblance too close 
 to have been accidental — and the thoroughly Byzantine cha- 
 racter of the earlier glass-paintings in their design and drawing. 
 
238 A LECTUEE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 The earliest existing specimens of painted glass are not older 
 than the twelfth century ; and, I believe, the earliest well-authen- 
 ticated example is not earlier than the middle of the twelfth 
 century. It may be doubted if any specimen is more than a 
 few years older than the middle of the twelfth century. The 
 example to which I allude is in the Cathedral of St. Denys, and 
 is supposed, from a portrait it exhibits of Abbot Suger, to be 
 some of the glass which it is known that dignitary presented to 
 his church in the middle of the twelfth century. It is executed 
 according to the method described by Theophilus, which I 
 have already mentioned; the colouring of the picture being 
 effected by means of pieces of white and coloured glass, and the 
 drawing and pencilling of the design being done with enamel 
 brown. This glass of Abbot Suger is a type of a class which 
 continued, with little variation, to be used in churches until 
 about 11^50 — a period of about 100 years — of which there are 
 numerous and rich specimens in France in the Cathedrals of 
 x\ngers. Sens, Chartres, Bourges, and in others ; and in England, 
 principally in the Cathedrals of Canterbury, Lincoln, and 
 Salisbury. 
 
 Painted windows generally may be divided into two classes — 
 Picture-tvindows, where the greater part of the design consists of 
 representations of the human figure — and Pattern-windows, whose 
 design principally consists of an ornamental pattern. 
 
 The picture-windows of this early style are extremely interest- 
 ing, both on account of theii" intrinsic excellence, and the 
 manner in which they betray the connexion between the art of 
 the middle ages and that of classical antiquity. They may be 
 divided into three classes: — The Medallion Window, in which 
 some connected story is told by a series of pictures set in medal- 
 lions, which are arranged throughout the window in a geo- 
 metrical order ; the Jesse Window, in wdiich our Saviour's 
 Genealogy is represented by a series of figures encircled or 
 enclosed within flowing scrolls of foliage ; and the Figure and 
 Canopy Windoiv, in which is represented a figure standing under 
 a canopy. The two first modes of design certainly had their 
 origin in remote antiquity ; the last, perhaps, can be hardly said 
 to be indicated in some of the ornamental paintings at Pompeii. 
 We see the medallion system in its utmost simplicity and 
 quaintness in some of the Assyrian sculptures, and again^ 
 refined by art and good sense, in some of the Eoman monu- 
 ments, particularly on the Trajan and Antonine columns, where 
 the events of a campaign are represented in a series of bas- 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 2'^^ 
 
 rt'liefs, wound in a serpentine manner round the shaft of a 
 cohimn; and a<^ain, on the Arclics of Titus and Constantino; on 
 the latter are some sculptured pictures in circular medallions. 
 
 There are also in the ^Euseum of the Vatican some very 
 beautiful bas-reliefs, representing figures encircled by flowing 
 scrolls of foliage, which it recpiires but little acuteness to per- 
 ceive are the type of the design of the Jesse window. And 
 both forms of design were handed down from the time of the 
 Eoman Empire to the period of which I am particularly speaking 
 — the middle of the twelfth centuiy— by an almost continuous 
 series of carved ivories and illuminated manuscripts. 
 
 It is not to be supposed that either the medallion or Jesse 
 window at all approaches the art of the ancient Eomans in the 
 excellence of the figure-drawing, the natural yet refined cha- 
 racter of the draperies, nor even in the distinctness of the com- 
 position. Unlike the tessellated pavements of the Eomans, or 
 the ornamental frescoes at Pompeii, and the tombs at Eome, 
 both the medallion and Jesse windows are too apt to appear 
 confused when seen from a little distance. The medallion 
 windows, indeed, in general, seldom have their design more 
 made out than that of a Turkey carpet, to which they are often 
 likened — very truly as regards their effect — which is that of 
 a mass of deep and vivid colours intersected by thin white lines, 
 by which the principal divisions of the design are indicated. 
 Instead of the figures being small in comparison with the 
 panels, and the panels being well cut out by broad borders — to 
 which is attributable the distinctness of the ornamental designs 
 of Eoman antiquity, and of the coloured ceilings of the sixteenth 
 century, which were borrowed from them — the figures are large 
 here in comparison with the spaces allotted to them, occupying 
 nearly all the gi'ound of the panel. The ornament is also large 
 in comparison with the figm-es, and, though the grounds of the 
 panels, and of the intermediate spaces of the window, are gene- 
 rally of diff*erent colours, the extent to which these grounds are 
 covered with the figures and ornaments prevents their colours 
 showing in sufficient quantities to produce proper distinctness in 
 the design ; and the manner in which the colours of the figures and 
 ornaments are interchanged and scattered all over these grounds 
 tends still more to produce monotony. It would seem as if the 
 designers of these windows were more anxious to secure a good 
 and imposing general eflect of colour, than to give prominence 
 to the figure part of the composition, so as to make the i)ictures 
 tell their own story plainly and distinctly. But as alVording 
 
240 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 effects of colour, many of these windows are quite unrivalled; 
 they are harmonious, and never raw or positive ; rich, and never 
 gaudy ; deep and intense, and never flimsy ; brilliant, and never 
 heavy or opaque; and, of course, in all these essential parti- 
 culars, contrast very favourably with their modern imitations. 
 The secret of their success lies rather in the peculiar nature of 
 the glass of which they are composed, than in the mode in which 
 the various tints are arranged. Each colour, besides being 
 deep, is harmonious in itself — an absolutely pure colour would 
 be a curiosity if met with in twelfth or thirteenth century glass 
 — consequently the effect can hardly ever be bad, in whatever 
 way the colours may happen to be arranged. The depth and 
 harmony of the colour qualities, so beautiful in themselves, ren- 
 dered a highly finished style of figure-painting improper as well 
 as unnecessary. If the figures had been highly and delicately 
 shaded, the depth of local colour would have prevented their 
 finish from being seen or appreciated ; and the harmony pro- 
 duced by shading with enamel brown upon glass of different 
 tints would have been superfluous where the tints themselves 
 were originally so harmonious. Therefore these ancient glass- 
 painters contented themselves with representing the deepest 
 shadows with absolutely black lines, and uniting these with a 
 very slight wash of shadow in half-tint, to prevent their appear- 
 ing too harsh ; and, in general, they avoided subjects which 
 could not be intelligibly represented by a few figures arranged 
 in one plane, like the figures' in a bas-relief, and placed on 
 a stiff backgroimd of blue or red, trusting to the glass itself to 
 do the rest. It is hardly possible to conceive a style of execu- 
 tion better adapted than this was to the peculiar material of the 
 twelftli and thirteenth centuries ; and, however we may criticise 
 the designs of this period, it must be confessed that the earliest 
 style of glass-painting, viz. that which was practised until the 
 middle of the thirteenth century, contains the germ of a true 
 and noble style, a path of high development and striking effects; 
 provided that the same material as that of the twelfth century 
 shall be again supplied, and provided that — and this is equally 
 essential — the task of developing the style is undertaken by 
 artists of the first ability, having the power, as well as the will, 
 to work up to that standard of perfection in figure-drawing 
 which classical antiquity affords, and which, even at the worst 
 times, seems constantly to have influenced the Byzantine artists 
 and their immediate followers, instead of its being left to the 
 efforts of mere draughtsmen, capable only of working down 
 
t-^ 
 
 A LECTURE ON 0LAS8-PA1NTIN0. '241 
 
 to models which must m)\v be considered imperfect or absurd, and 
 are only interesting from our being able to recognise in them the 
 art of a better period, in sjiite of the deformity with which it has 
 been overlaid by the uuskiliidness and corrupt taste of a rude age. 
 
 The design of the Jesse tvindow is, owing to its nature, in 
 general more distinct and effective than that of the IMedallion 
 window, though still very inferior in this respect to its classical 
 prototype ; and that of the Figure and Canopy window is yet 
 more intelligible, as far as regards the figure, but the canopy 
 is usually so insignificant, and so out of drawing, as often to be 
 made out with difficulty. 
 
 The Pattern windows are always less rich in colour than the 
 Picture windows. In general they are princi})ally com})osed of 
 white glass, on which are painted borders and scrolls of foliage. 
 They often bear a coloured border all round them, and coloured 
 glass is sparingly introduced into the pattern-work, to render its 
 design more marked, and to enrich its effect. 
 
 These different kinds of windows often are employed together 
 in different parts of the same building. In most cathedrals the 
 IMedallion windows are placed in the aisle windows of the na^•e 
 and choir ; the Figure and Canopy windows occupy the clear- 
 story; and the west window of the nave frequently exhibits a 
 Jesse. Pattern windows are mostly employed in the pierced tri- 
 forium, wdiere such exists, as well as in some of the windows of 
 the apsidal chapels, where perhaps light was an object. Thus 
 the windows having the most elaborate design are generally 
 placed nearest the eye, — a happy and sensible arrangement. The 
 large size of the figures in the clearstory may appear inju- 
 dicious, on account of the tendency of the figures to overpower 
 the architecture, and lessen the apparent height of the building; 
 but this objection, though sound in principle, will hardly hold in 
 practice, owing to the defective amount of shading in the figures, 
 which, thus become less distinct than might be expected from 
 their size, and present, in short, little else than an effect of 
 colour. 
 
 The ornamental details of these early glass-paintings are very 
 Greek in character. The foliaged ornaments are highly conven- 
 tional in their form, closely resembling the architectural foliage 
 employed by the Greeks, though less varied in their shape. 
 Trefoiled and cinquefoiled terminations are the most common. 
 It is seldom that a naturally shaped leaf occurs, and, when it 
 does, its serrations are not represented by notches, but by care- 
 fully drawn curves. A decided })reference for idealised form 
 
 R 
 
242 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 characterises the works of this period. The same Greek feeling 
 may likewise be observed in the figures and the draperies. In 
 some of the earlier examples we recognise the peculiarities of 
 the true Byzantine school in the classical contour of the heads, 
 their staring eyeballs, and inanimate expression. But a more 
 vigorous style soon developed itself; and, even so early as the 
 latter part of the twelfth century we meet with figures in glass 
 very closely resembling the old Roman, having heads quite of 
 classical contour, yet full of character, and of varied expression, 
 and only just sufficiently idealised to produce elevation of senti- 
 ment. The stiff, over-idealised, and inanimate Byzantine type 
 was, however, retained until quite the middle of the thirteenth 
 century in the representation of Divine persons, probably from 
 an unwillingness to depart from established precedents in matters 
 of such sacred import. The draperies of the earlier figures are 
 also truly Byzantine in their closeness and tightness ; but those 
 of the later figures are easy and natural, yet, in the character of 
 their folds, very like the old Roman. It is possible that they 
 were copied from nature, and that their classical air is partly 
 owing to the fact that many of the dresses used in the twelfth 
 century, and, perhaps, early part of the thirteenth, were actually 
 shaped like the Roman. Thus the tunic, or under-coat, of the 
 thirteenth century is exactly like the Roman in form. Again, 
 the military or state-cloak is the paludamentum of the Roman 
 generals without any variation. 
 
 The Ecclesiastical dalmatic is ' the same as the state dress of 
 the Roman Proconsul ; and, as if for the purpose of confounding 
 those enthusiastic moderns who are so shocked at any allusion to 
 paganism, and who look upon the twelfth and thirteenth cen- 
 turies as the " Ages of Faith," we occasionally see in the works 
 of this period the figure of a holy saint (no doubt copied from 
 some earlier example) innocently habited in the toga, the ordi- 
 nary dress of the ancient Romans. There is reason for supposing 
 that the dresses worn in the twelfth century were made of mate- 
 rials veiy similar to those used by the Romans, which may 
 account for the great similarity in the set and folds of the 
 draperies of the two periods. 
 
 What I have stated respecting the early emancipation of art 
 from the thraldom of Byzantine- tradition, as exemplified in the 
 glass-paintings of Northern Europe, may appear opposed to 
 the general impression that modern art dates from the school 
 of Cimabue, in the thirteenth century, but, in truth, the whole 
 subject is involved in the greatest obscurity. Writers are prone 
 
A LECTURE oN GLASt^-rAINTlNG. 24.'} 
 
 to jreneralise from a too limited collection of facts, and we must 
 recollect that hitherto more pains have been taken to investigate 
 the progress of the arts in Italy than in North Euro[)e. I can 
 only state the fact as I find it, without attempting to account 
 for it. But the naturahstic tendency of the school of Cimabue 
 in Italy, in the middle and last half of the thirteenth century, 
 soon began to be felt in North Eui-ope. We see it most strikingly 
 exemplified in the ornamental decoration of glass-paintings 
 from about the year 12(J(J downwards. The coiiventional Greek 
 foliage of the earlier part of the thirteenth century was about 
 this time gradually exchanged for foliaged ornaments composed 
 of the naturally Ibrmed leaves of the oak, maple, ivy, and haw- 
 thorn ; and the figure draperies became, in conformity with the 
 new style, broader and simpler in their folds. I am afraid that 
 the change was not attended with any benefit to the higher 
 interests of art, for I much question whether anything more 
 uninteresting and insipid was ever seen than the stereotyped 
 fiat features and screwed-u^) eyes which we meet with in nearly 
 all glass-paintings between 1250 and 1350, the next hundred 
 years of our history to which I am now directing your attention. 
 I cannot but think that glass-painting gradually deteriorated 
 from the middle of the thirteenth century, until it revived again, 
 in a very difterent phase, in the early part of the sixteenth cen- 
 tury; and that the greatest deterioration took place early in the 
 fourteenth century, contemporary with the architectural style 
 which is commonly called the early Decorated. It seems to me 
 that the whole of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was 
 spent in the attempt to get out of the early artistically flat style 
 of representation, proper for stifif colouring, into a more pictorial 
 style, requiring colour in broader masses and diminished depth ; 
 and that the greater part of the works of this period, and espe- 
 cially that of the earlier portion of it, must be regarded as 
 transitional, and displaying those contradictory features which 
 invariably present themselves on the abandonment of an esta- 
 blished principle without any distinct view of that which is to 
 succeed it. I am not asserting that the glass-painting of this 
 period has not its good points ; all styles have their beauties ; 
 but if consistency of principle be a mark of a good style, then 
 the glass-painting of tliis [)eriod is far inferior to that of the 
 immediately preceding and succeeding periods. 
 
 A great change in the design of glass-paintings was rendered 
 necessary by the general adoption of the mullioned window, and 
 consequent use of openings extremelv narrow in proportion t(j 
 
 R 2 
 
244 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 their height. The medallion window, which requires a width of 
 some four or five feet for its due development, was speedily 
 abandoned, and the expedient was adopted of combining the 
 picture with the pattern- window by introducing across the lower 
 lights of a white pattern- window two or more rows of panels 
 containing pictures, as well as filling the tracery lights with 
 coloured figures and ornaments. Sometimes these panels, like 
 medallions, simply contained groups of figures on stiff-coloured 
 grounds, as in the chapter-house windows at York ; more com- 
 monly the group was put under a canopy or shrine, as in the 
 nave of York, which had the effect of reducing the size of the 
 figures and making the picture indistinct ; whilst the canopy, 
 though complicated in construction, was drawn and coloured in 
 such a way as to appear as if it had been ironed out fiat — the 
 depth of the niche and projections of the tabernacle w^ork 
 being alike unrepresented. 
 
 The Pattern- window continued in use, each light of the 
 window being surrounded with a coloured border, and the 
 remainder filled with white glass, on which was drawn in black 
 a geometrical pattern with flowing scrolls of foliage. The Figure 
 and Canopy window was also common, each lower light having a 
 figure and canopy in it, the canopy having the same defects that 
 have just been noticed ; and the Jesse window was much em- 
 ployed : of this, the scrolls generally extended from one light 
 into another ; so that the whole of the lower lights were filled 
 with one connected design. In like manner, on the Continent, 
 canopies and groups were spread from one light to another. 
 But this practice was not followed in England : the usual 
 method here was, to divide the group into several portions ; to 
 put each under a canopy, and confine it within the limits of 
 a single light : thus, what was in fact but a single picture looked 
 as if it were three or more distinct pictures, each portion being 
 complete in itself, and separated from the others, not so much 
 by the muUions of the wdndow as by its pictorial accessories. 
 
 The colouring of this period was almost as deep and powerful 
 as that of the last period ; but the discovery of staining white 
 glass yellow, which seems to have been made about 1310, 
 tended very much to cause yellow to be used to the exclusion of 
 some other colours. Indeed glass-paintings, as early as about 
 1350, are remarkable for the quantity of white and yellow 
 stained glass in their composition, as is the case with the east 
 window of Gloucester Cathedral choir. At first the arrangement 
 of the figures in the groups was simple, like that of the former 
 
Pl.ATF 12 
 
 c. m»»Tu>. 
 
 iburuM, BKoa 
 
 FROM XOIITII AISI.E, STANFORD CllUUCil. NORTIIAM PTuNSIIIK:: 
 
I 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAIXTING. 245 
 
 age; but by degrees tlie figures were made to overlap one 
 another more; and the same fiat style of execution being per- 
 severed in, the consequence was, that the groups became far 
 more confused and indistinct than the earlier ones, which were 
 more cut out and insulated by means of the gi-ound of the panel. 
 In general, the individual colours were dis[)Osed in broader 
 masses than heretofore, — a peculiarity wliich was still more 
 remarkable in the next style, to wliich I shall now allude, and 
 the remarks upon which will carr}^ us down to the end of the 
 fifteenth century. 
 
 About 13(J0 or 1370 a remarkable change took place in the 
 manufacture of the glass, and this was simultaneous with a great 
 change in the mode of painting it. As late as 1350 there was 
 but little deviation from the earliest mode of painting; black 
 lines represented the deep shadows, and a very slight wash of 
 enamel work indicated the shadow in half tint. But after this 
 the lines diminished in thickness and intensity, and were 
 retained only as outlines ; the deep, as well as the light shadows 
 being represented by a stippled coat of enamel brown. Indeed, 
 the only real difterence between the execution of the imperfect 
 glass-paintings of the end of the fourteenth century and the 
 perfect ones of the sixteenth was, that in the latter the shadows 
 were deeper and more skilfully applied. In the works of both 
 periods shadows were represented by stipple shading, black 
 lines being only used for outlines. This mode of execution was, 
 of course, more pictorial than that which had preceded it ; and 
 the change in the manufacture of the glass to which I have 
 alluded, which principally consisted in making the colours 
 brighter and less positive, enabled the more delicate and finished 
 execution to be lully seen, and offered greater facilities for a 
 more pictorial and less mosaic style of colouring. 
 
 The Figure and Canopy window was the favourite design of 
 the period of which I am now speaking; the form of the window 
 openings during the Perpendicular style of architecture 
 particularly favouring it. A single figure and canopy commonly 
 filled each lower light, with or without a small subject beneath, 
 such as a coat of arms, or a group of figures, usually representing 
 tlie donor of the window and his family : and each of the upright 
 tracery lights was occupied with a smaller edition of the figure 
 and canopy. AVindows of this description, partly owing to their 
 being executed with light and delicately finished shading, and 
 to the proportion of white glass in their composition, always 
 have a particularly pleasing silvery appearance. They want the 
 
246 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 force of tlie earlier windows, but tliey are more delicate and 
 refined. Their design is also distinct, owing to the way in which 
 the figure is cut out by the coloured back of the niche, and 
 to the canopy itself being almost entirely white and yellow- 
 stained. Their great defect is their flatness. Though con- 
 siderable pains were taken by shading, and even by an attempt 
 at perspective drawing, to give projection to the canopy hood, 
 and rotundity to the figure, these old artists totally failed in 
 their object, partly through their timidity in applying shadow in 
 sufficient depth, partly through their ignorance of the true 
 effects of light and shade, and partly, I may add, through their 
 ignorance of the principles of correct drawing. Instead of the 
 picture aimed at, nothing was produced but a pleasing silvery 
 effect of colour. This defect is still more palpable in another 
 very common design of this period, consisting of three or more 
 shrines, with groups of figures placed under them, piled up one 
 above the other in each of the lower lights of a window. 
 
 We learn from these examples that there are but two ways of 
 producing a picture on glass — either with skilful shading, where 
 there is no particular attention paid to the position of the objects 
 to be represented ; or with comparatively little shading, in which 
 case it is essential that the figures should be well cut out and 
 separated from each other by a coloured ground. For, as I said, 
 the general distinctness of the Figure and Canopy design is 
 entirely owing to the latter principle being adhered to, though 
 accidentally. The confusion in-separable from the use of small 
 groups under shrines executed with so little shading, and without 
 attention to the placing of the figures — of which the great east 
 window of York affords a striking example — is owing to the 
 figures being designed so as to overlap one another, and to their 
 not being relieved from each other by a proper application of 
 light and shade. Windows so constructed look, at a little 
 distance, like a mere collection of pieces of glass of different 
 colours; and even when closely examined, it is sometimes not 
 easy, at first, to detach the figures from their shrines, and make 
 out the composition. 
 
 The Jesse window continued to be employed, but there is 
 nothing which calls for remark upon it. The Pattern- window 
 had dwindled down to the simplest of all compositions, being 
 composed of quarries of white glass, with some little ornament 
 painted on each, and having a border round the light with -a little 
 colour in it. 
 
 We are all aware tliat the middle of the fifteenth century is 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 247 
 
 lamous in the history of art, as the era I'rom wliich we date 
 the commeneement of onr modern system. It was at this 
 time that a new liglit broke in npon the minds of the Italian 
 artists as to the trne method of representation, and tlie great 
 trnths demonstrated by the paintings of iMasaccio and others 
 continued to be ekiborated during the whokj last half of the 
 fifteenth century and early part of the sLxteenth, until painting 
 reached its perfection nnder such geniuses as Ivaphael, Titian, 
 Tintoretto, and the other masters of the sixteenth century. 
 
 The great imi)rovement which took place in the middle of 
 the fifteenth century was perhaps not so much in drawing as in 
 the art of producing the effect of nature in light and shade. 
 Before the time of iMasaccio oil-paintings, though very often 
 beautifully drawn, were flat in effect, and consequently confused, 
 like those glass-paintings to which I last alluded. He seems to 
 have been the first who noticed how little Nature was observed, 
 and how little the ]iower of art was developed, in jiaintings 
 where perspective and light and shade were disregarded. And 
 the hint was not given in vain. 
 
 About the same time a standard of perfection hidden from the 
 mediaeval artists was brought to light by the discovery of the 
 antique sculptures at Eome, and artists once more beheld the 
 human fic:ure in its utmost beautv in forms now rendered familiar 
 by moans of casts, — forms in which we see our nature in spotless 
 jturity, innocent and sublime, and such as we may imagine those 
 of our first parents to have been. 
 
 The discovery was well timed. All prejudice against these 
 ancient works, on account of their pagan origin, had long 
 ceased w ith the extinction of paganism : they fell into the 
 hands of men capable of appreciating them, and the monu- 
 ments of a false religion became the means of enlisting on the 
 side of truth all those sympathies which it is the province of the 
 highest and most refined art to excite. Ideally I am not surprised 
 that the period of the "Kevival of Art," or the "Ivenaissance," 
 as it is variously termed, should always be regarded with such 
 enthusiasm, by all, indeed, but a very small knot of modern 
 writers, who, I am persuaded, will never obtain popular sympathy. 
 For '* Modern Art," as it is called by the writers of the sixteenth 
 century, by way of distinction from the dry and imperfect 
 medieval art, is inseparably connected with some of our most 
 pleasing reminiscences — with the conviction that about the end 
 of the fifteenth century the human race in Europe got a fresh 
 
248 A LECTURE ON GLAS?-PAINTING. 
 
 start. Men's minds then became expanded; and a spirit of 
 inquiry arose, before which the trammels of superstition, and the 
 false reasoning of the mediaeval era, were dissipated like mist 
 before the sun. Broad views began to be taken in other matters 
 besides art ; the foundation was then laid of modern liberty, and 
 of modern philosophy, to the united effects of which as well the 
 present material prosperity, as tlie higher intellectual and moral 
 culture of this country can be clearly traced. People who attempt 
 to revive mediaeval usages and mediaeval art seem to overlook 
 the great fact that the invention of printing, the Reformation, 
 and Lord Bacon's works, have separated the nineteenth century 
 from the middle ages by an impassable gulf. 
 
 As might be expected, the improvement in art, to which I 
 have alluded, was not confined to Italy, but extended its influence 
 to Flanders, France, Germany, and this country, and glass- 
 painting in all these countries, for a short period, felt the benefit 
 of it. We see a vast improvement in the glass-paintings executed 
 in the early part of the sixteenth century, both in drawing and 
 in light and shade ; and the improvement was progressive until 
 about the middle of the century, when the very causes which 
 had tended to its elevation, being pushed too far, occasioned its 
 decline. Considered as a pictorial art, glass-painting seems to 
 liave reached perfection between 1530 and 1550: it is perhaps 
 not too much to say that its decline commenced as early as 1545. 
 But to justify this assertion I must, with your indulgence, enter 
 a little into matter of detail. 
 
 Every species of representative art, whether oil-painting, water- 
 colour-painting, fresco, tapestry, mosaic-work, or glass-painting, 
 must, of course, be carried into effect by the use of certain mate- 
 rials, and the criterion of the proper mode of using such materials 
 is, that it displays their good qualities, and conceals their 
 defects, as much as is compatible with their employment. Thus 
 in glass-painting the good quality of the material, glass, is its 
 transparency — a quality which makes colours more vivacious 
 and briUiant than the colours of any opaque material. The 
 defectiveness of glass is its brittleness, and the impossibility, 
 in our present state of chemical knowledge, either of painting a 
 piece of glass with a variety of colours individually as bright as 
 the colours of glass tinted with them in its manufacture, or of 
 fastening a number of pieces of coloured glass together except 
 by means of a metallic and consequently opaque framework; 
 and also its limited scale of colour, if coloured glass alone is 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 219 
 
 used, and tlie impossibility of representing on it an amount of 
 deep transparent sliade equal to that which we see in oil-paint- 
 ings, particularly in those of the Venetian school. 
 
 The necessity of leading a glass-painting together is one of 
 those conditions which cannot be evaded by any ingenuity. The 
 lead-work and saddle-bars must be accepted as necessary parts 
 of the composition. The design must be made wath reference to 
 them, and that glass-painting must be acknowledged to be the 
 best which admits of the leads being thrown into the outlines, 
 and made to serve as outlines ; and which by the simplicity, 
 I might almost say roughness, of its design and execution, pre- 
 vents the harshness of the saddle-bars from being obtrusive. In 
 this respect the glass-paintings i)rior to 1550, and until the 
 eighteenth century, must be considered superior to those later 
 works in which the attempt has been made to ignore the leads 
 and saddle-bars, by leading the work together in squares indepen- 
 dently of the outlines of the composition, or by twisting the 
 saddle-bars so as to avoid their cutting the design at regular 
 intervals ; because both methods immediately suggest the idea 
 of a blemished picture, and make us immediately perceive how 
 much better the work w^ould be without leads or saddle-bars. 
 But a window cannot be constructed without them : hence 
 it is better to adopt them as essential parts of the design ; 
 and the beautiful windows of the choir of this cathedral, which 
 bear date between 1532 and 1539, show that a design so 
 constituted is compatible with high pictorial effect. Again, 
 another condition, which must be particularly observed, is the 
 preservation of the transparency of the material to the greatest 
 extent consistent with the production of a i)icture. Whatever 
 the amount of shading, there must be a great deal of clear high 
 light, — that is to say, the glass, in the high lights of the picture, 
 must be left clear and untouched with any enamel colour. To 
 subdue or lay down those high lights is at once to deprive a 
 glass-painting of its chief beauty, its brilliancy and transparency, 
 and to reduce it to the appearance of a bad oil-painting, because, 
 however it may be made to vie with an oil-painting in drawing 
 and composition, it must always be inferior to an oil-painting in 
 the nice gradations of tone and tint, and in that clear-obscure 
 liquid shade which can be given with such astonishing fidelity in 
 an oil-painting ; besides that it is more like a sketch than a finished 
 work, on account of the decided manner in which the outlines of 
 objects are defined by the leads. In this respect again I would 
 snbmit that the glass-paintings of the middle of the sixteenth 
 
250 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 century are superior to subsequent works. In tlie most liighly- 
 finished of them, like the glass in this cathedral, there is always 
 abundance of high lights left clear in the glass. These high lights 
 are indeed, to a certain extent, now obscured in the glass of the 
 cathedral by the decomposition of the material from long ex- 
 posure to the weather : but I am speaking of these works as they 
 issued from the painter's studio. There are plenty of other 
 glass-paintings in existence, of the same date as these, which, 
 owing to more favourable circumstances, have preserved the 
 surface of their material, and which consequently enable us to 
 form an opinion of the original effect of other works similarly 
 executed. 
 
 To what extent shading ought to be carried in glass is a 
 question which receives its best solution in the rule which 
 imposes on every representative art the necessity of its suggesting 
 no defects. And here again we recognise the greater skill of 
 the artists of the middle of the sixteenth century as compared 
 with that of their successors. I have mentioned the impossibility 
 of representing in a glass-painting that amount of clear deep 
 transparent shade that one sees in an oil-painting. For want of 
 this power many subjects are wholly unfit for a glass-painting ; 
 and the artists of the middle of the sixteenth century, with that 
 common sense which usually denotes uncommon knowledge, 
 invariably declined to represent such subjects. They confined 
 their selection of subjects to groups of foreground figures, using 
 the background merely as an accessory ; they did not shade their 
 pictures up to a point, like the Venetian oil-paintings, but, at 
 the expense of unity of composition, represented the figures as 
 if seen under the influence of broad sunshine — the figures at the 
 extremities of the group thus having the same force of light and 
 shade upon them as those in the centre of the group. They were 
 Avell aware of the great effect of shadow in giving distinctness and 
 force to a design ; but knowing the defectiveness of glass as a 
 medium of shade, they took care to confine their shade within 
 small limits. Thus they were very fond of architectural back- 
 grounds to their groups, because the soffits of the arches gave 
 them the opportunity of introducing very decided shadows, 
 though of limited extent — shadows which had the effect of sepa- 
 rating the foreground from the background, and giving relief 
 and distance. These and many other devices for concealing the 
 defectiveness of glass, such as the avoidance of foreshortened 
 figures and the like, will be easily perceived on looking at the 
 choir windows of this cathedral, which are perhaps the finest 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 251 
 
 specimens of pictorial glass-paint inu: in the world. Com|)are 
 them with the dnll heavy works of tlie last century, in which 
 the conditions of glass-painting are wholly overlooked, — as. for 
 instance, the great west window of New College, at Oxford, 
 painted from a magnificent design of Sir Joshua Reynolds, but 
 one unfortunately wholly unsuited for the purpose of a glass- 
 painting, — and I think you will agree with me in preferring the 
 glass-paintings of the first half of the sixteenth century to the 
 later examples. Yet let us not condemn tlie authors of those 
 later works as men of unartistic mind. They were, on the con- 
 trary, men of high artistic attainments ; they fully ajipreciated 
 the obligations of glass-painting to oil-painting : tlie rock they 
 split upon was their overlooking the peculiar conditions of glass- 
 painting — the ditYerence between a painting which transmits light 
 and one that reflects it. In endeavouring to make g] ass-painting 
 rival oil-painting in all respects, they attempted an impossibility, 
 and therefore their works, notwithstanding their liio-h artistic 
 merit, are ineffective as compared with those of the middle of 
 the sixteenth century. 
 
 The latest windows that I am acquainted with, executed pre- 
 cisely as these of Lichfield, are the windows of the transepts and 
 of the north aisle of the choir of Brussels Cathedral. They are 
 all dated between 1")4:0 and 1549; they are coarser in execution 
 than these, but are most effective. Indeed I do not know any 
 works in glass which are so powerful, without in the least degree 
 violating the essential conditions of the art. But immediately 
 after the middle of the sixteenth century, and in France even a 
 little before, we see the attempt to carry the art beyond its 
 legitimate limits. The windows of Gouda Church, in Holland, 
 magnificent compositions though they be, which were all ex- 
 ecuted between 1555 and 1003, are already affected by the 
 change ; and the windows in the south aisle of Brussels 
 Cathedral, which w^ere executed in the seventeenth century, 
 though very fine as artistic compositions, are yet wrong both in 
 design and execution. Great effects of light and shade, as in 
 Ilubens' pictures, were here attempted, at the expense of the 
 material, which looks flimsy in the light parts of the picture and 
 dull and Hat in the shaded parts. It is only necessary to com- 
 pare these windows with those on the opposite side, to which I 
 have alluded, to be sensible of the great superiority of the prin- 
 ciple upon which the latter are designed and executed. Soon 
 alter this glass-painting seems to have grt^atly grown out of 
 fashion. Woi'ks occur onlv at intervals, and these are executed 
 
252 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 on the principle of an ordinary oil-painting, the composition 
 being shaded up to a point and enamel colours used profusely, 
 either to heighten the coloured glass, or more commonly in sub- 
 stitution of it. At length coloured glass almost ceased to be 
 made or used. With the exception of a fine window by Price, 
 in the church of St. Andrew's, Holborn, in which some attention 
 is paid to the earlier system, all the great works executed in this 
 country are done with enamel colour ; as the window at New 
 College, Oxford, and the great east window and south window of 
 the aisles of St. George's Chapel, Windsor — all which resemble 
 bad and dingy paintings, or weakly-coloured window-blinds, though 
 their composition is artistic and the execution careful and refined. 
 In France and Germany what little glass was executed was done 
 in the same manner. 
 
 So matters remained until the revived taste for mediseval art, 
 which commenced here and abroad about thirty years ago, a 
 taste which in this country undoubtedly received a great impulse 
 at first from the writings of Sir Walter Scott, and of late years 
 from the effoi-ts of a small but active party, who seem to have 
 made use of the popular feeling as a means to an end — that of 
 reviving religious forms and ceremonies calculated to lead men's 
 minds towards the Church of Kome, — forms and ceremonies 
 which, though not actually condemned at the reformation, can 
 hardly be said to be in harmony with it, and were on that account 
 wisely dropped by tacit consent in the course of the last two 
 centuries. 
 
 In France and Germany the revival has spread more for the 
 sake of art than from any particular religious sentiment ; and 
 therefore in both countries it has been more conducive to the 
 interests of art than with ourselves. In no branch of art has 
 this been more remarkable than in glass-painting. 
 
 The French, like ourselves, have done little else than take up 
 glass-painting archaeologically, and copy old works, though with, 
 it must be admitted, far greater success in point of fidelity of 
 imitation than the English glass-painters. But in Germany 
 the movement has been an artistic one, and has borne great 
 fruits. At Munich, glass-painting has for years past been 
 carried on as a fine art, by some of the greatest artists in Ger- 
 many, in conjunction with a revived style of architecture, not 
 Gothic, but a style more severe, yet as symmetrical, magnificent, 
 and refined, as that of the sixteenth century. To say that glass- 
 painting is correctly practised by the Germans is what I cannot 
 do, but I will say, that in point of real art, there are no modern 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 253 
 
 glrtss-paiiitings ia the world to comparo with theirs for one 
 luonient. The defectiveness of tlieir practice is deep and jier- 
 liaps inveterate, — not only do they paint up their ghiss with 
 enamel colours (using however coloured glass for their colours) 
 to such an extent as to almost destroy its transparency, but 
 they seem to lose sight too much of the contrasted style of 
 arranging colours in ancient glass, and of the use of violent con- 
 trasts of light and shade, which give the old cinque-cento glass- 
 paintings their power and vivacity ; and to pay too much minute 
 attention to blending the several local colours, by wliicli an 
 harmonious eftect is produced at the expense of vigour and force. 
 I am aware that the German artists deny their practice of dulling 
 down their pictures to be voluntary, and that they excuse it 
 by a desire to obtain the harmonious effect of old glass, and to 
 obviate the flimsiness and excessive pellucidness of the modern 
 material. But one does not see why, if sincere, these artists, 
 with Royal patronage to back them, should not attempt to 
 make glass like the old. For it is in the glass-house, and in 
 the glass-house alone, that we can hope for any real improvement 
 in the effect of glass-pointings. It is a fallacy to ascribe the 
 harmony of ancient glass to the effect of age. Age does har- 
 monize glass to a certain extent, but nothing can supply the 
 want of harmonizing coloured glass.^ 
 
 Still, nothing can supply the want of art : and I fear the pre- 
 sent depraved state of glass-painting, in this country, is far 
 more attributable to this want than to that of good glass — else 
 our glass-painters would not be so inferior to the Germans. 
 But, however this may be, I declare that the state of glass- 
 })ainting is in England, at the present moment, worse than it 
 has ever been at any other time or in any other country. With 
 the enormous expenditure of late years upon painted windows, 
 w^e are the laughing-stock of foreigners ; and if a great artistic 
 work is required, there is no choice but to go to Munich. This 
 has been the decision of the noblemen and gentlemen who 
 have subscribed for the painting of the windows of Glasgow 
 Cathedral. And though they have been much blamed for it, 
 there can be no doubt that they are right. It is idle to say that 
 they are to wait until tlie establishment of a native school capable 
 of such works. The best patronage in the end is that which 
 always chooses and pays for the best article wherever it can be 
 obtained, in matters of art as well as in matters of merchandize. 
 
 1 On the recently altered Muuicli practice see before, pp. 5i\ 5-\ 
 
254 A LECTURE ON GLASS-PAINTING. 
 
 Some English glass-painters have, it is true, lately started, and 
 it appears that they intend to rival the German artists ; but 
 their performance as yet has been only such as to make us think 
 that the Germans are likely to maintain their superiority. 
 
 The truth is that glass-painting has got into bad hands. The 
 growing archaeological and hierarchical view taken in this 
 country by " the movement " has had a retrogressive and not a 
 progressive tendency. Patrons and amateurs have been caught 
 with details, and have not looked one inch beyond them ; con- 
 sequently artists have not come into the field ; but they have left 
 the archaeology and details to be done by draughtsmen; and 
 there has been no employment, as in Germany, of artists of as 
 high a reputation as our Royal Academicians. It is to be hoped 
 that people will at last grow sick of archaeology, and ask them- 
 selves the plain question, whether in matters of religion we 
 ought to be archaeologists at all, or, if archaeologists, whether we 
 should not carry our archaeological associations to the earliest 
 period of Christianity, — to a period of art which was accepted 
 in the sixteenth century, and the influence of which, acting 
 upon the gothic element in our natures, made christian art and 
 architecture what we see them — the art, higher in true christian 
 sentiment than it ever was at any period of the middle ages ; 
 and the architecture, as refined as the Eoman, yet as varied and 
 picturesque as the gothic. I am not ashamed to say that I have 
 no sympathy with the *' movement " in the sense in which the 
 phrase is at present accepted: No man wishes more sincerely 
 than I do to spread the blessings of Christianity, and to afford 
 to all the opportunity of public worship ; but I do think that we 
 should do wisely to turn our backs on the middle ages and. their 
 associations, — to accept the reformation as a great fact, which 
 it is our duty not to discourage, but to carry out ; renouncing both 
 the romanticism of the middle ages, which none of us really feel, 
 and those things which remind us of the mediaeval Church, the 
 errors of which we have long since abjured. And I believe that, 
 acting as we then shall, in the spirit of the nineteenth century, 
 the opprobrium will soon cease, that, though giants in, science 
 and practical skill, we are dwarfs in art, especially in religious 
 art. 
 
 In bringing these imperfect, but not hasty, observations to a 
 close, I would again urge on all those who really wish to 
 have clear notions of glass-painting to study the glass in tliis 
 cathedral. If we once learn to appreciate that, we shall have 
 made a great step. We shall then perceive more clearly how 
 
A LECTURE ON GLASS-rAINTINO. 
 
 0>\r, 
 
 the earlier style wliicli I first notieed can be developed in a 
 manner worthy of ns. It is these two styles alone which should 
 be studied. The employment of either must depend on circum- 
 stances, and the character of the place intended to be decorated 
 with p:lass. The earlier stvle is more fit for severe buildin^fs, — 
 the later for buildings of more ornamental character. They 
 will stand well together, and need fear no comparison. The 
 greater flatness of the earlier style is no objection to it, })rovided 
 that the figures executed in it do not appear to be flat. An 
 appearance of rotundity is compatible with low relief, as we see 
 in the head on a coin — and so there can be an artistically flat 
 style in glass-painting, and an artistically pictorial style, co- 
 existing, and preferable the one to the other according to cir- 
 cumstances. 
 
 
XIII. 
 
 ON AN HEKALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH AISLE 
 OF THE NAVE OF YORK CATHEDRAL. 
 
 By Charles Winston and Weston Styleman Walford. 
 (From the 'Archaeological Journal,' vol. xvii., 1860.) 
 
 HE nave of York Catliedral contains the most 
 perfect, and perhaps the most extensive, remains 
 of painted glass of the early part of the four- 
 teenth century, of which this country can boast. 
 All the windows of the aisles (except two), the 
 great west window of the nave, and all the clear- 
 story windows (except two), retain their original 
 glazing, but little mutilated, and as yet, for- 
 tunately, not " restored." 
 
 We learn from documents that the foundation of the nave 
 was begun on the south side, towards the east, in April, 1291, 
 and that an altar, dedicated to St. Edmund, was erected on the 
 south side of the nave in 1326 ; which might lead us to seek 
 the earliest glazing in those windows of the south aisle which 
 are nearest the transept. Want of leisure has prevented us 
 from undertaking the complete examination of more than one 
 window, namely, that which is tlie subject of this memoir, the 
 first window reckoning from the east in the north aisle of the 
 nave. But such an examination of the heraldry in the other 
 windows of the nave ^ as we have been enabled to make, appears 
 to justify a confident opinion that the earliest glazing is that 
 contained in the window about to be described, and, judgiug 
 only by the style of execution, in the vv^indow which is next to it 
 and known as the Bell-founder's window.^ In point of style, the 
 
 * The arms and heraldic devices in 
 the original glazing, which remain in 
 these windows, will be noticed in some 
 detail at the end of this communication. 
 
 2 The Fabric Rolls of York Cathedral, 
 lately published by the Surtees Society, 
 do not commeuce till 13G0, long after 
 
 the date of these windows. The great 
 west window was probably not erected 
 until a few years after the date of the 
 contract for it in 1338. The two win- 
 dows to which in 1338 about one-fifth 
 of the sum given by Archbishop Melton 
 for the west window was applied, were 
 
ox AN nERALDIC WINDOW IN YORK CATHEDRAL. 257 
 
 resemblance wliifh all the aisle windows bear to one another is- 
 so close as to lead to the belief that tluTo is but little difTerence 
 in date between them ; a belief corroborated by the evidence 
 supplied by such of the existing heraldry as is coeval with the 
 oriirinal ijlazinc: of the windows. ISome of the clearstory win- 
 dows may be of the same date as the latest windows of the 
 aisles, some a little later than these ; but they all appear to be 
 earlier than the great west window, which is manifestly the 
 latest of the series. 
 
 The painted window taken for our subject may be shortly 
 described as a white pattern window enriched with coloured 
 pictures and ornaments ; a kind of window common to the whole 
 Decorated period of glass-painting, and extensively employed in 
 these very aisles and clearstories.^ The general ground of its 
 lower lights is of white glass, ornamented with interlacing bands 
 and tendril-like scrollages of leaf-work painted in outline. This 
 is crossed by two rows of rectangular panels, on each of which is 
 represented a canopy enshrining a group of figures. The tracery 
 lights are filled with fiofures and ornaments. Owino: to these 
 parts of the design being richly coloured, the window in general 
 efiect is as if it was composed of six alternate horizontal stripes 
 of white and coloured glass, its tracery-head forming one of the 
 coloured stripes ; although it is true that the transition from the 
 one to the other is a good deal modified by the rich tint of 
 the glass composing the white stripe, as well as by the con- 
 tinuation across it of the coloured borders to the lights, and by 
 the insertion, in the white intervals, of colom-ed panels con- 
 
 probably iu the clearstory. Unfor- four easternmost ones in the south, are 
 tunately the two missing clearstory similar in general design to the subject 
 windows ai"e the one on each side which of this memoir. So are also, in prin- 
 was nearest the great west window, the ciple, such of the clearstory windows 
 very windows, in short, to which we as retain their glass. Of the two re- 
 might naturally infer that the money maining side windows of the south aisle, 
 in question was appropriated. one is a Jes.<e, the other has three large 
 ^ Each aisle of the nave is furnished figures and canopies, and once had a 
 with seven side windows and an east small subject beneath each. The west 
 window, of three lights each. In the windows of the aisles have each three 
 nave is the gi-eat west window of eight canopies with figures, and originally 
 lights ; and in the clearstory are eight had a small subject under the centre 
 windows on each side, of five lights one only. The great west window has 
 apiece, the two supemumei-ary win- three tiers of cimopies resting on one 
 dows being over the western aisles of another, and a strip of ornamental glass 
 the transepts. Only the first six, from at the bottom, in its lower lights. The 
 the east, of the side windows of each tracery lights of all are variously filled 
 aisle retain the original glazing. Of with ornaments, heraldry, or figures, 
 these all in the north aisle, and the 
 
258 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 taining shields of arms. The uniformity of the arrangement is 
 somewhat broken by the introduction, at tlie base of tlie centre 
 light, of a coloured panel on which is an effigy of tlie donor of 
 the window. The subjects of the other pictures are taken from 
 the legend of St. Catherine. 
 
 In order to facilitate a more detailed description of the design, 
 recourse has been had to the diagram, to which the following 
 numbers refer : — 
 
 No. 1. On this panel is represented a canopy having a red 
 ground to the niche, under whicli is the kneeling figure of an 
 ecclesiastic with tonsured head, and habited in a blue cope and 
 hood, an aumuce, the white fur of which is seen about the neck, 
 white surplice, purple under-dress, and purple shoes. 
 
 Nos. 2, 3, 4. That figure is unquestionably referred to in an 
 inscription in Lombardic capitals, yellow on a black ground, 
 wliich in a mutilated state crosses the window in the direction 
 of Nos. 2, 3, and 4. The letters which remain in No. 2 are — 
 PUR : M — RE : PiERE ; — in No. 3, dene : ke : ceste : f; — in 
 No. 4, RE : FIST : fe — ; whicli in all probability may be thus 
 read, restoring the missing letters in the blank spaces from 
 which the lettering, &c., have been removed : priez : pur : 
 maistre : piere : de : dene : ke : ceste : fenestre : fist : 
 fere : ^ 
 
 No. 5. On this panel is represented the first of the series of 
 subjects from the legend of St. Catherine. It appears to be 
 St. Catherine pleading for the "faith before the Emperor Maxi- 
 min. A young nimbed female stands before a regal person 
 seated on a throne, who, from his angry countenance and up- 
 lifted gloved hand, seems to be yielding to the evil suggestions of 
 the devil perched on his shoulder. The canopy or shrine under 
 which the group is placed is of an ordinary type. The niche 
 arch is ornamented with segmental foliations, the niche ground 
 
 ^ This inscription had been over- tion of the glass itself with a telescope, 
 
 looked until a few years ago, when Mr. and succeeded in reading the remains 
 
 Niblet, a member of the Institute, of the inscription, which were found 
 
 being in the Cathedral, availed himself to coincide exactly with the copy as 
 
 of a scaffold that had been erected at corrected ; a strong corroboration of its 
 
 this window, and examined the glass; accuracy, "Dene" seems to occur 
 
 and finding some letters, he made a again in a very mutilated inscription 
 
 copy of them, which he showed to one about half-way down one of the lower 
 
 of the writers of this memoir; who, lights of the third window from the 
 
 after a few conjectural corrections, dis- west in the north clearstory of the 
 
 covered that it contained the name of nave. It may, however, be the last 
 
 the donoi\ His colleague made the syllable of a longer name. 
 
 same discovery on a careful 
 
 examma • 
 
AISLE OF Tin-: NAVE OF YOlIK CATHEDRAL. 
 
 259 
 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 cc 
 _L-i_l_l..l L.I 
 
 :ky : 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 5 
 
 :^- 
 
 {>\ !'■'' 
 
 pT 
 
 ^^s 
 
 9 - 
 
 sV^s 
 
 « S 
 
 ^ I =: 
 
 ^ 
 
 10 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 Heraldic Window in hie Nave, Yoiuj Cathedral. 
 
 (Diagram showing the arrangement of tlie desiga) 
 
260 ON AN HERALDIC AVINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 is red, and the ground of the panel on which are the canopy 
 spires is coloured blue. The canopy itself is chiefly yellow, but 
 some white and bits of other colours are introduced. The 
 figures have flesh-coloured faces, and coloured glass predomi- 
 nates in their dresses. 
 
 No. 6. The subject of this panel seems to be St. Catherine's 
 contention with the philosophers sent by Maximin to confute 
 her. Two male figures in civil costume, one Avearing the cap 
 usually appropriated to theological doctors (the head of the other 
 being lost), appear as if they were rebuking a young nimbed 
 female who is standing with them. The ground of the canopy 
 niclie is blue, and that of the spire is red. 
 
 No. 7. The subject of this panel is in a very mutilated state. 
 But on examining the remains, and comparing them with the 
 inaccurate engraving of this window given by Drake in 1736,^ 
 it would seem to be the execution of the philosophers by JMaxi- 
 min's orders, in revenge for having allowed themselves to be 
 converted to the faith by St. Catherine's arguments. On the 
 west side of the picture are two pairs of feet, as if originally 
 belonging to two standing figures, most likely the two execu- 
 tioners. There is on this side also one figure, standing, perfect 
 to the Avaist ; and near it, but not exactly above it, the head and 
 shoulders of another figure, with a ferocious countenance, and 
 having flowing hair confined with a band. This figure holds in 
 its left hand the two wrists, having hands attached, of another 
 figure now wanting, and from the sway of the body there can be 
 little doubt that the principal figure was originally in the act of 
 beheading the figure now wanting (and which we may conclude 
 was one of the philosophers), though its right arm has been lost 
 or removed. There is, moreover, an indication of a sword-blade 
 over the head of the principal figure, in the position it would 
 occupy if upraised to strike a blow. At the east corner of the 
 picture is a kneeling figure perfect, its hands raised in supplica- 
 tion, and v/ith terror depicted in its countenance, representing, 
 as we may suppose, the other philosopher, xlll the figures are 
 in civil costume. The ground of the canopy niche is red, and 
 that of the spire is blue. 
 
 No. 8. The subject of this panel is the imprisonment of St. 
 Catherine, during which, according to the legend, she was 
 attended by angels, and visited by Maximin's empress and his 
 minister Porphyry, both of whom she converted to the faith. 
 
 See Drake's ' History of York,' p. 527. 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YOIJK CATlIEDRAr.. 261 
 
 St. Catherine is represented standinjr, her hands joined in prayer, 
 within a small canopy or tahornaflo havino; a blue external roof 
 beneath the nielie of tlie principal shrine. 'J'he lower part of 
 her person is concealed by some castellated worlv. A wliite 
 chain proceeds as from her neck, under the fibnla of her mantle, 
 and is secured at the other end to one of the shafts of tlie small 
 tabernacle. Immediately over her head, and between it and 
 the niche arch of the small tabernacle, is an angel, having the 
 right hand raised in benediction, and holding in the lel't a scroll, 
 inscribed ave : maria. The letters, which are Lombardic capi- 
 tals, are white on a black ground. The convert Porphyry, 
 placed on the w^est side of the small tabernacle, is kneeling, with 
 hands joined in prayer, and adoring the saint. His head is 
 flesh-coloured ; the hair, which is combed into a large roll on each 
 side of the face, is stained yellow ; ^ and he is habited in a purple 
 robe furnished with a hood. Some white is shown, as of an 
 under-dress. The shoes are blue. On the opposite side is a 
 crowned female, kneeling and adoring the saint, with hands 
 joined in prayer. The ground of the niche of the small taber- 
 nacle is blue, that of the principal canopy is red, and that of the 
 spire is green. 
 
 No. 9. The subject of this panel is the miraculous deliverance 
 of St. Catherine from the punishment of the wheel. Tlie prin- 
 cipal figure is standing, with hands joined in prayer, between 
 two wheels. The head of the fif^ure is an insertion : it belonccs 
 to the Perpendicular period. Two executioners lie disabled on 
 the ground on the east side of the saint, and two soldiers in 
 yellow mail on the other side. Above are two angels with 
 swords, striking the wheels and rescuing the saint. The ground 
 of the canopy niche is blue, that of the spire is red powdered 
 with yellow wavy stars. 
 
 No. 10. The subject of this panel is the beheading of St. 
 Catherine. An executioner is represented beheading a female. 
 The head of the saint is an insertion ; it belongs to the Decorated 
 
 * The yellow stain appears to be discovery of the property long pre. 
 
 more or less used in all the windows ceded its practical application ; for the 
 
 of the aisles. This window affords the silvered tessera} used in the mosaics 
 
 earliest example of its use that we are at St. Mark's, Venice, and also at St. 
 
 at present acquainted with. The stain- Sophia, Constantinople, occasionally ex- 
 
 ing property of silver as applicable to hibit a change from white to yellow of 
 
 glass-painting is said to have been dis- the transparent ghvss with which the 
 
 covered by the accidental dropping of silver is overlaid, occasioned by its con- 
 
 a silver button into a vessel containing tact with the metal whilst exposed to 
 
 melted glass. It is probable that tlie heat. 
 
262 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 period. Above are two angels raising up a napkin arranged in 
 the form of a festoon. The little figure it originally supported 
 has been lost. This may be an allusion either to the carrying of 
 the saint's soul to paradise, or, according to the legend, to the 
 transportation of her body to Mount Sinai. The ground of the 
 canopy niche is red, and that of the spire is red also, but this 
 clearly is an insertion, though of glass coeval with the window. 
 In all probability it was taken out of one of the aisle win- 
 dows, whicli, as before mentioned, have been deprived of their 
 glazing. 
 
 Nos. 11, 11 (in the border of the centre light). Each of 
 these spaces is occupied by an angel under a canopy, tossing a 
 thurible ; these, as well as the next two subjects, are probably 
 allusive to St. Catherine's burial by angels, according to the 
 legend. 
 
 Nos. 12, 12. Each of these spaces is occupied by an angel 
 under a canopy, playing on a harp. 
 
 Nos. 13, 14. The subjects of these tracery lights seem also 
 allusive to St. Catherine's burial. In both liglits are two figures, 
 those in No. 13 proceeding in an eastward, those in No. 14 in a 
 westward direction. The foremost figure in each case is nimbed, 
 and clad in a mantle, long under-dress, and shoes. That in 
 No. 14 is tossing a thurible ; its head, which belongs to the Per- 
 pendicular period, is an insertion. Neither of tlie rearmost 
 figures is nimbed ; each carries a taper, one coloured green, the 
 other pink. The figure in No. 14 is in a white surplice with a 
 jewelled band about lialf way down the skirt. The other appears 
 to be in a light brown dress ; it is possible that the dress was 
 white like the other, but is discoloured by age. The ground of 
 each light is red, ornamented with a white scroUage bearing 
 maple-leaves, and the border of the light is green with white 
 quatrefoils. 
 
 No. 15. The subject of this light seems to be the reception of 
 St. Catherine's soul into heaven. In the upper part are the 
 remains of a figure of Christ. The body of the figure is an 
 insertion. The left hand clasps a book, the right is open with 
 the fingers extended. Below are two angels clad in white, 
 kneeling, and raising up a napkin in the form of a festoon. The 
 place of the little figure it probably once supported is occupied 
 with fragments which, seen from below, are unintelligible. All 
 parts of the interior of the light are much mutilated. The head 
 of one of the angels belongs to the Perpendicular period, and is 
 an insertion; the head of the other is original, and the hair 
 
AISLE OF THE XAVE OF YOl^K CATHEDRAL. 2G3 
 
 is stained yellow. The ground of the light is blue ; its border is 
 red with white quutrefoils. 
 
 Nos. l(j, 10, IG, 1(J. These remaining four tracery liglits are 
 filled merely with coloured and white glass. 
 
 Nos. 17, 17. Each of these little circles in the heads of the 
 two outer lower lights contains a crowned head nimbed ; possibly 
 for 8t. Edmund and the Confessor. 
 
 No. 18. In this circle is a pur[)le bird, resembling a hawk, on 
 a blue ground : probably the device of the donor, and intended 
 for the Danish raven, in allusion to his name.^ 
 
 No. 19 is a shield, bearing gu. 2 keys Sc\ltier-wise or, St. Peter, 
 the patron of the cathedral. 
 
 No. 20 is a shield on a cinquefoiled panel having a red 
 ground and yellow beaded border, bearing or a double-headed 
 eagle displayed sab. armed gu., the Emperor. 
 
 No. 21 is a shield on a cinquefoiled panel like the last, but 
 having a green ground, bearing gu. three lions passant guardant 
 in pale or, England. 
 
 No. 22 is a shield on a red cinquefoil, bearing az. semy of lys 
 or, France. 
 
 No. 23 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing paly of six 
 or and gu., Provence or Arragon. 
 
 No. 24 is a shield on a red cinquefoil, bearing or an eagle 
 displayed sah. armed gu.. King of the llomans. 
 
 No. 25 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing quarterly 
 1 and 4 gu. a castle or, 2 and "3 arg. a lion rampant purpure, 
 Castile and Leon. 
 
 No. 2(3 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing arg. a cross 
 jx)tent between seven cross-croslets or, Jerusalem. 
 
 No. 27 is a shield on a green cinquefoil, bearing gu. an escar- 
 buncle or, Navarre. 
 
 No. 28 (in the border of the centre light). Under a small 
 canopy, the niche ground of which is green, is represented a 
 knight, in -white banded mail ornamented with the yellow stain, 
 wearing a coifte de maillcs, and having a e^pear, belted sword, 
 rowelled spui*s, and long surcote displaying gu. a cross arg. 
 
 ' In the English of tliat period Danes lies named Deane have borne ravens, 
 
 and Danish may be found sj>elt respec- which have been occasionally converted 
 
 tively Deneia and Denez (;\fter the into crows or choughs ; the Denmans 
 
 Anglo-Sax. Dene, Danes). According to have a raven fur their crest ; and analo- 
 
 these orthographies Danes' raven and gously several families named Dennis 
 
 Danish raven would differ only in one (variously spelt) have borne Duimh 
 
 letter from Dene's raven. Some fami- axes. 
 
264: ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 No. 29. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
 a kniglit in yellow banded mail, without a spear, but in other 
 respects like the last, on whose surcote is displayed arg. a 
 cross gu. 
 
 No. 30. Under a similar canopy, with red niche ground, 
 is a crowned figure in white and yellow-stained mail, without a 
 spear, on whose surcote is displayed az. semy of lys or, France. 
 
 No. 31. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, 
 is a crowned figure, drawn like the last, whose surcote displays 
 gu. 3 lions passant guardant in pale or, England, 
 
 No. 32. Under a similar canopy, with red niche ground, is a 
 crowned female figure clad in a green under-dress and a mantle, 
 the latter being az. semy of lys or, France. 
 
 No. 33. Under a similar canopy is a crowned female figure, 
 whose mantle bears gu. 3 lions passant guardant in pale or, 
 England. 
 
 No. 34. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is a 
 knight in white and yellow-stained mail, with a spear, and long 
 surcote on which is displayed gu. 3 lions passant guardant in 
 pale or a label az.. Heir apparent of Engla7id. The lions in this 
 instance look eastwards, but no one conversant with early 
 heraldry will attach any importance to this anomaly. 
 
 No. 35. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
 a knight clad in banded mail ; he is in tlie act of raising his 
 bacinet from his coiffe de mailles with one hand, the other holds 
 a spear. On his surcote is displayed or 3 chevronels gu., Clare. 
 
 No. 36. Under a similar canopy, with red niche ground, is a 
 knight in the act of raising the vizor of his bacinet ; on his 
 surcote is displayed cheeky or and az., Warenne. 
 
 No. 37. Under a similar canopy, having the niche ground 
 green, is part of a knight, from the belt downwards, the rest of 
 the figure having been destroyed. The part of the surcote which 
 remains displays gu. semy of cross-croslets or. The coat, accord- 
 ing to Drake's engraving, is gu. a fess between 6 cross-croslets 
 or, Beauchamp. 
 
 No. 38. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
 a knight, armed like the rest in mail, and with coiffe de mailles, 
 &c. The part of the surcote above the belt displays gu. 3 water 
 budgets arg., Ros. The white belt hangs down in front, con- 
 cealing the charge, if any, on the lower half of the surcote. 
 
 No. 39. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
 a knight, armed like the rest. His surcote, which is much 
 mutilated, displays gu. a lion rampant arg., Mowhray. 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YOlIK CATIIEDlJAr.. 265 
 
 Xo. 40. Under a similar canopy, with green niche ground, is 
 a knight whoso surcote disphiys cheeky or and az. a fess (ju., 
 CUffunh 
 
 Xo. 41. Under a similar canopy is a knight whose surcote 
 displays or a lion rampant az., Percy. 
 
 I'he two other lights are bordered with the following devices, 
 a yellow lion rampant on a red ground, and a white eagle dis- 
 played, having its beak and claws stained yellow, on a green 
 ground. These devices are placed alternately, so that the eagle 
 is at the very top, and the lion in the middle of the bottom 
 of each light. The lions and eagles on the western sides of the 
 lights look towards the east; those on the eastern sides of 
 the lights look towards the west. 
 
 Of blaster Peter de Dene, whose name appears in the above- 
 mentioned inscription, so little is generally kuow^n, that we may, 
 perhaps, be excused for inserting a sketch of his life, especially 
 as it will materially assist us in ascertaining the date of this 
 window, and in appropriating, more precisely than we otherwise 
 could, the various coats of arms which it displays. He was 
 a " Doctor utriusque juris :" and it was probably with reference 
 to this academical degree that the term ** Magister " was usually 
 applied to him ; though that was, we conceive, more commonly, 
 as well as more properly, used to designate tiiose who had 
 graduated in Arts. He was also a canon or prebendary of the 
 cathedral churches of York, London, and \Yells, and of the colle- 
 giate churches of Southwell and Wim bourne Minster.^ Of his 
 birth, parentage, or early history we have no particulars. If, as 
 seems most probable, his family was of little or no consideration, 
 he must have had great abilities or very influential friends to 
 enable him to acquire so much preferment. From some events 
 in his life there is reason to believe that he was born about 
 12G0 ; hardly much before that year, for we shall see he w\as 
 living in 1332, and then evidently not a very old man, or at 
 least not very infirm. The earliest mention of him that has 
 been discovered is in 1295, when he was summoned with the 
 justices and others to assist at a parliament to be held at West- 
 minster.2 In 1297 he appears to have been one of the council 
 of Prince Edward, in which he was associated with several 
 bishops, earls, barons, and others, among whom was AVilliam de 
 Grenefeud (or, according to modem ortliography, Greenfield), 
 
 See Lid Will, Scriptores dcceui, col. ii(Jo7. - Pail. Writs, i. p. 'iU. 
 
26G ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 canon of York ; ^ no doubt the future chancellor and archbishop 
 of that name. He is not the only canon there mentioned, and 
 we may reasonably assume that, had Peter de Dene been then 
 a canon, he would have been so designated. The Prince, after- 
 wards Edward II., was at that time about thirteen years of age. 
 We next meet with Peter de Dene in 1300, when the abbot and 
 convent of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, granted him a pension 
 of 101. a year,^ a substantial annuity at that period. Though he 
 could not then have been much more than forty years of age, if 
 so old, the purpose and conditions of the grant show him to have 
 been a person of acknowledged learning, ability, and influence ; 
 for he engaged to be faithful all his life to the abbot and convent, 
 and to undertake their causes and business within the kingdom 
 of England when they came to his knowledge, and especiciUy all 
 disputes between them and the archbishop, prior, and archdeacon 
 of Canterbury ; with whom, being their neighbours, differences, 
 we may presume, not unfrequently arose. In 1302 he and also 
 William de Greenfield were summoned, as two of the King's 
 Clerks, to appear before the Chancellor, Langton, to advise on 
 some arduous affairs of the King.^ We find him in 1304 
 claiming to be a canon of London, and complaining that his 
 vote had not been allowed on the election of Ralph de Baldock 
 to that see : in the course of the dispute he appealed to the 
 Pope, but we learn from a bull of Clement V. that he did not 
 prosecute the appeal to a decision.^ 
 
 He was summoned with the justices and others to assist at 
 various parliaments held in the 28th, 29th, 30th, and 33rd 
 years of Edward I., and also to attend the parliament to be held 
 at Carlisle, to advise the King preparatory to his intended expe- 
 dition into Scotland, which was frustrated by his death.^ That 
 parliament assembled on the 30th of May, 1307, at which time 
 Peter de Dene appears to have been domiciled at York, as 
 domestic chaplain and chancellor to the Archbishop, and a 
 canon of the cathedral ; for on the 31st of January in that year 
 Archbishop Greenfield, who appears to have become one of his 
 patrons, desired the dean and chapter to admit ^'Magistrum 
 Petrum de Dene clericum domesticum commensalem et cancel- 
 larium nostrum Eboracensis ecclesie canonicum " to the next 
 
 1 Pari. Writs, i. p. 62. -^ Rymer, i. p. 980. 
 
 2 Thoru's Chron., Scriptores decern, ^ p.^rl. AVrits, i. pp. 83, 91, 113, 138, 
 col. 1979. 182. 
 
 3 Pari. Writs, i. p. 110. 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YOKK CATHEDRAL. 207 
 
 vacant dignity in the cathedral.^ How long he had held tliosc 
 offices, or afterwards continued to hold them, does not aj)pear ; 
 but his connexion with York commenced, in all prubal)ility, 
 under Greenfield, who ^vas appointed to the archbishopric in 
 December, 1304. Though styled " canonicum," he has not 
 been found actually filling any particular stali at York so early 
 as 1307. In Le Xeve's Fasti, by Hardy, he is mentioned as 
 prebendary of Gevendale in 1312, but this has been found to be 
 an error.- Though we have good reason to believe he held the 
 j)rebend of Grindall at a later period, the time of his appoint- 
 ment to that stall does not appear. It was filled by another 
 person in August, 1308, and therefore he must have succeeded 
 to it after that date. He is not called canon in the inscription 
 on the window, yet the kneeling figure, which, no doubt, was 
 intended to represent him, is in a habit closely resembling that 
 of a canon. On the 4th of August, 1308, the Archbishop allowed 
 Peter de Dene, canon of York, and rector of Elneley (probably 
 Emly, near Huddersfield), to choose a confessor; and on the 
 30th of October, 1309, he received permission to let his living of 
 Elneley to farm, and to be non-resident for three years. The 
 follo^^ing day his term of non-residence was extended to seven 
 years. On the 11th of April, 1309, the Archbishop made him 
 his vicar-general during his absence from the diocese. On the 
 19th of October, 1311, Master Peter de Dene, rector of Elneley, 
 had again the /Vrchbishop's permission to choose a confessor ; 
 and on the same day a commission was issued, authorising 
 William de Pickering, the Dean of York, and John de Nassing- 
 ton senior, canon, to inquire how it happened that he held two 
 livings, the rectoiy of Elneley and the living of Emelden in the 
 diocese of Durham (perhaps Embledon, in Northumberland). 
 On the 24th of September, 1312, he is again called canon 
 of York, and appointed vicar-general of the Archbishop.^ 
 
 Though he had become thus intimately connected with the 
 cathedral church of York, he had not separated himself from 
 the monastery of St. Augustine, Canterbury. We learn from the 
 
 ' Greenfield's Register. by John de Sandall iu April, 1313, 
 
 2 We learu from the Rev. James under a Papal provision; and that there 
 
 Raine, to whose kindness we are in- was some dispute about the appoint- 
 
 debted for such of the particulars re- ment, and Peter de Dene was one of 
 
 lating to Peter de Dene as have been those commissioned to intpiire into it ; 
 
 derived from Archbishop Greenfield's which would hardly have been the case, 
 
 h'egister, that William de Pickering, had Peter himself claimed the probond 
 
 who had heltl this prebend, died on the in question. 
 7th of April, 131 J, and was succeeded ^ Greenfield's Regi.ster. 
 
268 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 chronicler of that house, that in the same year (1312) he had 
 certain spiritual benefits conferred on him in return for the 
 temporal benefits and services that he had rendered to the abbot 
 and convent. He had been, it appears, a constant defender of 
 them, and in time of need had given them two hundred marcs ; 
 besides this he had erected, at his own expense, certain buildings 
 on the north side of the chapel of the infirmary, which bore his 
 name. Induced by these services and benefactions, the abbot 
 and convent granted that three monks should pray daily at three 
 different altars for him, and for the souls of his parents, relatives, 
 and benefactors, and for his own soul after his death ; and also 
 that an anniversary for himself and his parents should be cele- 
 brated on St. Margaret's day during his life, and, after his 
 decease, on the day of his death.' No names being mentioned, 
 we learn nothing from this transaction as to who were his parents 
 or benefactors ; as the souls of the former were to be prayed for, 
 we may assume they w^ere then dead. 
 
 He was again vicar-general of the Archbishop during his 
 absence in June, 1313;^ and in the same year he is styled canon 
 of York, and vicar-general of the Archbishop, in a return made, 
 the 30th of July, to a mandate directing an inquiry as to the 
 goods of the Knights Hospitallers.^ In 1316 he was one of 
 eleven " Magistri " that were desired by the King to assist with 
 their counsel the Bishops of Norwich and Ely and the Earl of 
 Pembroke, who were about to proceed on an embassy to the 
 Pope.* It related probably to the affairs of the King with 
 the Scots, since, in the ensuing year, the Pope attempted to 
 negotiate a peace between the two kingdoms, which the Scots, 
 apparently with reason, considered much to their disadvantage. 
 
 Peter de Dene resigned his living of Elneley in February, 
 1317-18, which was then valued at seventy marcs per annum,^ 
 a good income at that time. He had been summoned to assist 
 at various parliaments held in the 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 
 14th, and 15th years of Edward 11.^ A change now came over 
 his fortune. We find tliat on the 2nd of June, 1322, John 
 Gififord, by reason of a provision made for him by the Pope, was 
 admitted to the stall of Grindall, which was then vacant " per 
 ingressum religionis Magistri Petri de Dene et professionem 
 
 I 
 
 ' Thorn's Chron., Scriptores decern, ^ Greenfield's Register, 
 
 col. 2012, 6 Pari. Writs, vol. ii. part i. pp. 138, 
 
 2 Greenfield's Register. 153, 174, 176, 179, 183, 198, 216, 220, 
 
 ■■' Kellaw's Register, Durham. 236, 246. 
 ■* Rymer, ii. p. 305. 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YORK CATHEDRAL. 200 
 
 ejus." ^ blaster Peter was tlien probably about sixty-two years 
 of a^e ; and tliis withdrawal Worn active life miiilit be supj)osed 
 to have been in order to spend the evening of his days in the 
 peaceful retirement of a cloister. But it was, in fact, the com- 
 mencement of troubles wliich saddened the remainder of his 
 life. 
 
 After the execution of Thomas Earl of Lancaster, wliicli 
 quickly followed his defeat at Borouuhbridge in 1322, the power 
 of the Despcucers became predominant. Severe measures were 
 forthwith adopted. against such of his adherents as had not either 
 fallen in battle or been made prisoners ; and Peter de Dene, who 
 was believed to have been one, found himself in great jeopardy. 
 His connection with the Lancastrian party does not previously 
 ai)pear. His uninterru})ted success would seem to justify us in 
 assuming that till this reverse his conduct had been generally 
 approved of by the King and his friends. The fact of his having 
 been appointed one of the advisers of the ambassadors sent to 
 Eome by the King in 131(3, rather tends to show he was hot then 
 a Lancastrian. For though the Bishop of !Xorwich, John Salmon, 
 and the Earl of Pembroke, Aymer de Valence, two of those 
 ambassadors, had been also two of the commissioners forced upon 
 Edward in 1310, by the Lancastrians, for the better regulation of 
 the aflairs of his kingdom and household, yet this bishop was 
 in 1312 placed at the head of a commission, consisting of the 
 King's friends, to correct the ordinances which had been made 
 by the former commissioners, and he was chancelh r in 1320. 
 And as regards the Earl of Pembroke, though he had joined the 
 Earl of Lancaster against Gavaston, the murder of the latter by 
 the order, or at least with the approval, of the Earls of Lancaster, 
 Hereford, and Warwick, in 1312, after Pembroke, to whom he 
 had surrendered, had engaged to spare his life, not only made 
 this Earl lukewarm in their cause, but seems to have led to his 
 eventually abandoning their party. The other ambassador, John 
 llotham, had been recently raised to the see of Ely. Little is 
 known of his previous jjolitical atttachments. He had been one 
 of the King's chaplains and chancellor of the exchequer, and 
 been sent by Edward on a mission to Ireland ; but as he was 
 Chancellor of England from 1318 to 1320, at which time Lan- 
 caster was influential, we may assume he was not regarded by 
 that Earl as an adversary. Erom the rigour of the };ersecution 
 against lV*ter do Dene, it seems probable that he had by some 
 
 Greeufield'a Register, 
 
270 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 means given great offence to the King's party. The chronicler 
 of St. Augustine's, however, says it was without his fault, and 
 speaks of the enemies of Peter as noble and powerful, but does 
 not give any of their names. They were intent not only on his 
 capture and imprisonment and the depriving him of his property, 
 but even sought his life — a degree of enmity which may warrant 
 a suspicion that some tergiversation was imputed to him. In 
 this state of things, unable to resist his adversaries, he had 
 recourse to the monastery which he had so faithfully served and 
 liberally benefited ; and he there took on himself the habit of a 
 monk in 1322. His position, however, was still such that he was 
 able to make terms with the abbot and convent on his admission : 
 he neither took all the usual vows nor gave up all his property. 
 He was to retain some houses {domos) that he had built within 
 the monastery, and his secular attendants, and also certain per- 
 sonal property to be disposed of as he thought fit, and the use of 
 some silver plate as long as he lived. He was not bound to 
 attend with the other monks in the church, chapter, refectory, 
 dormitory, cloister, or elsewhere, either for Divine service or for 
 any other purpose ; but was to be allowed to remain with his 
 attendants in his own chamber day and night, and give himself 
 to prayer, contemplation, study, and other becoming (honestis) 
 occupations as he might be disposed.^ For several years he 
 conducted himself very creditably and satisfactorily. He taught 
 canon law to the monks and others, gave counsel to the abbot 
 and seniors in the house, conducted their most private and diffi- 
 cult affairs, and was allowed a reasonable time to walk about 
 both within and without the walls of the monastery. At length, 
 growing weary of this kind of existence, and having no longer 
 any apprehension from his enemies without, he was desirous of 
 returning to secular life. He mentioned this again and again to 
 the abbot and convent ; but they deferred the consideration of 
 the matter, and would not consent to his departure. They were 
 probably the more unwilling to offend him, or that he should 
 leave them, because, on being admitted, he had made his will 
 and bequeathed to them several highly esteemed and valuable 
 books on canon law, and also the greater part of his money 
 and plate. Frustrated in his endeavours to obtain permission to 
 depart, he meditated means of escape. At that time the rector 
 
 ^ Thorn's Chron , Script, decern., col. Terttarii were those attached to reli- 
 
 2036-8, 2055. In consequence of the gious houses who took only some of the 
 
 qualified profession which he made, it vows, and were not strictly monks. See 
 
 is said ' * d(3 fercm professionem emisit." Du Cunge, Tertiarms. 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YOUK CATUEDRAL. 27 I 
 
 of St. ]\rartin's church, Canterbury, was one John do Bourne. 
 Tlie outer wall of the abbey, if it did not then actually adjoin 
 his eliurehyard, was separated from it only by a narrow way. 
 He had a brother, George de Bourne, who possessed a house at 
 Bishopsbourne, about four miles from Canterbury. With these 
 two bruthers the discontented monk concerted a plan for his 
 escape, and was to pay them 101. for their assistance. On the 
 day of St. Lucia (December 13), 1330, John, the rector of St. 
 Martin's, came by invitation to dine with the infirmarer of the 
 abbey ; and during dimier he rose from table, and, pretending 
 some business required his attention, he went to the chamber of 
 Peter de Dene and had a long conversation with him. In the 
 evening at supper Peter mentioned to his attendant that he had 
 celebrated mass that day, but shoukl not on the morrow, and 
 therefore desired that he might not be disturbed in his morning's 
 sleep ; for he was accustomed, notwithstanding the easy terms 
 on which he w^as admitted, to rise at midnight to perform the 
 offices usual at that hour. His servant, after waiting some time, 
 retired to rest in another chamber^ leaving a boy with his master, 
 and the door unlocked. Before midnight, having thrown off his 
 monk's habit, he withdrew, accompanied by the boy. They took 
 with them six dishes and six saucers {salsaria), probably part of 
 the silver, the use of which when he entered he had stipulated 
 to retain, and, passing through his own cellar to a gate which led 
 to the garden of the cellarer, the lock of which they had broken, 
 they found their way to the abbey-wall opposite St. iMartin's 
 church. There they made a preconcerted signal to notify their 
 arrival, by throwing over a stone ; and the rector, and his 
 brother, and two other persons wlio had brought three horses to 
 the spot, came and placed two ladders against the abbey-wall ; 
 and two of them ascending the wall seated themselves on it, and 
 having drawn up one of the ladders, let it down on the other side 
 into the garden. Peter and the boy having got over the wall, 
 the former was placed on horseback and conducted through 
 Bromden ^ to George de Bourne's house. On the flight of the 
 monk being discovered, there was a great commotion in the mo- 
 nastery, and inquiries were made in all directions for the fugitive. 
 At length it became known that he was concealed at Bishops- 
 bourne. The house was watched all night, and on searching it 
 
 ' Probably a close or piece of land ted, vol. iv. p. 443. The object iu 
 also called Bromedowne, lying nearly crossing that was most likely to avoid 
 behind St. Martin's church. See Has- detection. 
 
272 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 the next day lie was found carefully rolled up in a bundle of 
 canvas. He was brought back to St. Augustine's and confined 
 in the infirmary. The chronicler proceeds to relate in detail how 
 he was treated, and the consequences of this flagrant breach of 
 discipline. Peter de Dene contended that his qualified vows did 
 not oblige him to remain in the monastery, and he appealed to 
 the Pope. A bull in his favour was in due time produced, the 
 genuineness of which was questioned by the abbot and convent.^ 
 The result is not clearly given ; but it should seem that he 
 eventually submitted to the abbot, and probably died in the 
 monastery. We have seen that his stall at York was not filled 
 up till 1332, wlien the proceedings respecting him were drawing 
 to a close. That he should have been allowed to retain it at all, 
 after he had entered the monastery, is remarkable. On one 
 occasion he is represented as saying that, ^'if he were young and 
 able-bodied (corpore potens), he would willingly go to the Court 
 of Kome" to complain of the conduct of the Prior of Christ 
 Church and others, who had interposed on his behalf. The par- 
 tictdars of his flight and concealment do not imply any great age 
 or infirmity of body, but are consistent with the supposition that 
 he was not more than seventy years of age, if he were really 
 so old. 
 
 There can be no doubt, we think, that this Master Peter de 
 Dene is the person mentioned in the inscription remaining in the 
 window above described ; indeed, no other person of the name 
 has been found to whom it can. with any probability be referred. 
 Let us, then, consider tlie window with a view to ascertain the 
 period of the donor's life to which the glass may be most rea- 
 sonably ascribed. The heraldry, the figures, and the style and 
 execution are the elements tliat are most available for this pur- 
 pose. The probable date inferable from the style and execution 
 has already been stated. In heraldry displayed on escutcheons 
 and surcotes the window is remarkably rich ; and, what is very 
 unusual in glass of that age, not a single coat is wholly missing. 
 
 First of the escutcheons of arms: they are chiefly those of 
 sovereigns, yet clearly several of them were not contemporaries 
 with the donor; for at no time to which the execution of the 
 glass can be reasonably attributed were there living an Emperor 
 of Germany, a King of the Komans, a King of Jerusalem, and a 
 Count of Provence or King of Aragon, whom it is at all likely 
 Peter de Dene intended to compliment. The escutcheons seem 
 
 1 Thorn's Cbron., Sciiptores decern., coll. 2055-2066. 
 
AlSr.K OF THE XAVK (»F YOIJK CATIIKDHAL. 273 
 
 rather to have had a jijenealogieal object, and to liave indicated 
 some of the most distingiiisliod alliances and connections of the 
 reig:ning sovereign of England. Reckoning from the west, in the 
 first light are the arms of the Empeior, Provence or Aragon, and 
 Jerusalem ; in the second those of England, and most probably 
 the King of the l\omans ; and in the third those of France, 
 Castile and Leon, and Navarre. This remarkably early example 
 of the double-headed eagle may be referred to Frederic IL, who 
 married Isabella, the sister of Henry HI., and aunt, consequently, 
 of Edward I. ; Provence (for this, rather than Aragon, the coat 
 paly of six or and gii} may, we think, be safely assumed to be) 
 to Queen Eleanor of Provence, daughter of Count Kaymond and 
 mother of Edward I. ; and Jerusalem to Guy and Almeric de 
 Lusignan, successively Kings of Jerusalem, whose nephew, Hugh 
 le Brun, Count of La Marche, was the stepfather of King 
 Henry III. The single-headed eagle, associated with that with 
 two heads at this early period (a curious and interesting ftict on 
 which we shall have more to say presently), may be attributed 
 to Eichard King of the Eomans, the brother of Henry III., and 
 uncle, consequently, of Edward I. France may have been placed 
 there in compliment to Margaret, daughter of Philip the Hardy, 
 and second queen of Edward I., whom he married in September, 
 1299 ; Castile and Leon in memory of his former queen, Eleanor 
 of Castile ; and Xavarre as an additional compliment to Queen 
 3Iargaret, whose brother, Philip the Fair, had become King 
 of Navarre by his marriage Avitli Joan, daughter and heiress of 
 Henry I. of Navarre, in 1284, the year before his accession to 
 the throne of France. These alliances, though of little value for 
 ascertaining the date of the glass, accord in several respects 
 better with Edward I. than with his son Edward IL ; for, if 
 France and Navarre, and Castile and Leon, would suit equally 
 well with the latter, whose queen Isabella was daughter of Philip 
 the Fair, and his mother Eleanor of Castile, the Emperor, Pro- 
 vence, Jerusalem, and the King of the Pomans would be removed 
 one generation furthci- from the English sovereign then upon the 
 throne. 
 
 It has been mentioned that both of the outer lights in this 
 window are bordered with the following devices alternately, viz., 
 a yellow lion rampant on a red ground, and a white eagle dis- 
 
 ^ Though these arms are generally or p. 320, and also in a Roll of the thir- 
 
 four pallets gn., they sometimes occur teenth century in tho Harleian Collec- 
 
 paly or iind fju., as in Mr. Stacey Gri- tion, No. G580. 
 mahli's Koll, Collectanea Topog., vol. ii. 
 
274 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 played on a green groimd. The lions and eagles on the western 
 sides look to the east, and those on the eastern sides to the west ; 
 but variations of this sort in heraldic figures were at that time 
 deemed of no importance. It is not possible to speak positively 
 as to the significance of these devices. They are most likely 
 of heraldic origin. The lions may have referred to Edmund 
 FitzAlan, Earl of Arundel, who bore gu. a lion ramp. or. As to 
 the eagles there is greater difficulty ; for no one is known to 
 have borne vert an eagle or several eagles displayed arg., who is 
 at all likely to have been complimented in this window. Gavaston 
 bore vert three or six eagles displayed or ; and had these eagles 
 been yellow, w^e should certainly have thought them referable to 
 him. The heraldic tinctures were in such borders not unfre- 
 quently changed, most probably for artistic effects in colour. 
 There is an example of this in the border of the first window, 
 reckoning from the east, in the south aisle, where we find white 
 castles on a red ground, intended, no doubt, for Castile, which 
 was gu, a castle or. We are therefore disposed to regard these 
 eagles, though they are white, as having been complimentary to 
 Gavaston ; especially as his arms were in one of the clearstory 
 windows, and as in the borders of the west windows of both aisles 
 the eagles are yellow. Those borders consist of castles and 
 eagles displayed, one above the other, both yellow, not on a 
 ground, but separated by pieces of glass fer pale red and green, 
 the tinctures of the respective shields of Castile and Gavaston. 
 It will be remembered Gavaston was killed in 1312. As the 
 favourite of Prince Edward, he was most likely known to Peter 
 de Dene when the latter was of that Prince's council. Owing to 
 his evil influence over the Prince, he was banished by Edward I. 
 in 1307 ; but Edward II. immediately on his accession, which 
 occurred about three months after, recalled him, created him 
 Earl of Cornwall, and married him to his own niece, one of the 
 daughters of his sister Joan of Acre by her first husband, Gilbert 
 de Clare, Earl of Gloucester. Had this window been executed 
 after those events, and the royal favourite been complimented 
 in it at all, we think it would not have been in this obscure 
 manner. 
 
 Let us now examine the arms on the surcotes of the figures in 
 the border of the middle light, and see what evidence they will 
 furnish. It will be best to take these figures in pairs as they 
 stand opposite each other. The two uppermost appear to be 
 knights in mail with long surcotes, on which are respectively gu. 
 a cross arg., and arg. a cross gu. But that he has no nimbus, the 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YOIJK CATHEDRAL. 27.') 
 
 latter might he supposed to be 8t. George; tlie other is also 
 without a ninihns. We lind in the printed I\oll t. Edward II. these 
 arms borne by two kuights respectively ; the former by Sir Henry 
 de Cobham the uncle, and the latter by Sir Michael de Herte- 
 clawe. In the printed Ivoll t. Henry HI. the former are ascril)e(l 
 to Peter de Savoy, and the latter to Kobert de Vere. Peter de 
 Savoy was an uncle of Queen Eleanor of Provence, the mother 
 of Edward I. ; but, seeing the figures which follow, there is no 
 good reason why he or any of the knights by whom these arms 
 were borne should have been represented above the kings and 
 queens of Erance and England. These crosses, it will be remem- 
 bered, are those which were respectively borne by the Hospitallers 
 and Templars ; and these two figures may have been intended 
 not for individuals, but as representatives of those two leading- 
 military orders. Eio:ares of two knights with similar arms on 
 their cyclases and shields formerly existed in one of the windows 
 of Bristol cathedral of about the same period, and were probably 
 meant to represent those two orders. The next two figures in 
 this border are kings ; one with Erance on his surcote, and the 
 other with England. The next two are queens ; one with France 
 on her dress, and the other with England : it is remarkable that 
 neither bears any other arms than her husband's. The next two 
 are knio:hts, one bearino; on his surcote England with a label az., 
 the arms at that time of the eldest son of the King of England, 
 and the other Clare Earl of Gloucester. The next two are also 
 knights, one bearing Warenne Earl of Sun-ey, and the other the 
 remains of the coat of Beauchamp Earl of Warwick. The next 
 are also knights, one bearing Bos of Hamlake, and the other 
 jMowbray. The last two are also knights, one bearing Clifford, 
 and the other Percy. The last four knights were also barons. 
 All these figures appear to represent full-grown persons, without 
 any intentional differences of age, and, with the exception of the 
 first two, may, we think, be assumed to have been meant for por- 
 traitures of persons living, or but recently deceased, when the 
 window was designed. If so, the coat of England with a label 
 az. shows there was then an heir apparent to the throne of 
 England old enough to l)ear arms, and to be represented as an 
 adult knight; and this nnist have been either Edward II. or 
 Edward III. in the lifetime of his father. There are several 
 reasons for believing that it could not have been the latter. He 
 was not bom till November, l.'jlji, and therefore in 1322, when 
 the Earl of Lancaster was put to death, and Peter de Dene took 
 refuge in St. Augustine's, that prince was onlv ten years of age. 
 
 T 2 
 
276 ox AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 If this glass were executed after the donor had attached himself 
 to the Lancastrian party, it was most likely after 1316, and we 
 should in all probability have had in it the arms of the Earl of 
 Lancaster and other leaders of that party ; whereas, although the 
 arms of Warwick, who died in that year, are there, those of 
 Lancaster and Hereford are not ; yet these two Earls were re- 
 spectively the first-cousin and brother-in-law of Edward II. If 
 it be supposed that the object of the donor was to propitiate the 
 King on some occasion when the royal authority was triumphant 
 over the Lancastrians, we would ask, why tlien have we the arms 
 of Warwick, to whom Gavaston's death was principally due, and 
 not those of Despencer, the then all powerful favourite ? Why, 
 too, those of the Earl of Gloucester, who was killed in 1314, and 
 not those of the young princes, Thomas of Brotherton and Ed- 
 mund of Woodstock, the brothers of Edward 11. , the younger of 
 whom was eleven years older than their nephew Prince Edward ? 
 The last of the Clares Earls of Gloucester fell at Bannockburn. 
 He was so young, not having been born till 1291, that his arms 
 could hardly have been placed in this window, except as those of 
 a prince of the blood royal, having been a grandson of Edward I. ; 
 and therefore he was not likely to have been thus commemorated 
 after his death. The long surcotes and the rest of the costume 
 of the figures also claim rather an earlier date than the time 
 when Prince Edward, afterwards Edward III., might be expected 
 to have been represented as an adult knight. If, moreover, the 
 two uppermost figures are a Hospitaller and a Templar, it is 
 improbable that the latter would have been placed in this window 
 after tlie order of the Templars had fallen into disgrace and been 
 actually abolished in 1312. The earlier in the reign of Edward II. 
 this glass is supposed to have been executed, the less probable is 
 it that the coat of England with a label az. should be that of his 
 son Prince Edward; and it is difficult to believe the window 
 could have been presented after the donor became a monk in 
 1322. It is surely far more probable that the heir apparent to 
 the throne was Prince Edward, afterwards Edward II., though 
 then it must be referred to the very end of his father's reign ; for 
 it cannot be so early as 1296, when the previous Clare Earl of 
 Gloucester died, and when we have no reason to suppose Peter 
 de Dene was in any way connected with the cathedral of York. 
 Indeed, his interest in tliis cathedral appears to have been due 
 to the patronage of Archbishop Greenfield, and did not therefore 
 commence before 1305, that prelate having been appointed to 
 the see in December, 1304. The young Earl of Gloucester was 
 
AISLE OF TIIK XAVK OF YOIJK CATIIFDIJAL. 277 
 
 only sixteen years of ngo wlien Edward I. dicxl ; and Jolm de 
 Warenue, Earl of Surrey, who slionld also seem to Lave been 
 represented in eonseqnrnee of his eonnexion with tlie royal 
 family, did not marry the king's nieee till L*)OG. At that time 
 Peter de Dene was abont forty-six years of age : his eareer had 
 been successful, and his benefactions in money and buildings to 
 the monastery of St. Augustine, Canterbury, show that for some 
 time previous to 1312 he had not lacked either the moans or the 
 disposition to be munificent. 
 
 In 130G or the following year the figures in the border of the 
 middle light might have represented the follow^iug persons, viz. : 
 A Hospitaller and a Templar; Edw^ard 1. and Philip the Fair; 
 Margaret Queen of England, and Joan of Navarre Queen of 
 France, who died in 1304, or the Queen-Dowager of France, 
 Mary of Brabant, the mother of Margaret Queen of England ; 
 Prince Edward, and Gilbert de Clare Earl of Gloucester ; John 
 de Warenne Earl of Surrey, and Guy de Beauchamp Earl of 
 Warwick; Sir William de llos of Hamlake, and Sir John de 
 iMowbray ; Sir Eobert de Clifford and Sir Henry Percy. Of these, 
 Warwick, Bos, Mowbray, Clifibrd, and Percy had distinguished 
 themselves in the war with the Scots. Peter de Dene may 
 have made their acquaintance in the north, even if he had not 
 done so at some of the numerous parliaments which he had 
 attended, or he may have been indebted to them for advance- 
 ment or other favours ; as their figures were most probably 
 placed in this window from either friendship or gratitude. We 
 may add, that Clifford fell at Bannockburn (1314), Percy died 
 in 1315, and Warwick in 131G, all leaving heirs under age; 
 and though these noblemen may have been so commemorated 
 after their deaths, it is more likely that this should have been 
 done while they were living. 
 
 On a careful review of all the preceding facts and observa- 
 tions, we think the conclusion which they warrant is, that the 
 glass of this window was executed certainly in the first quarter 
 of the fourteenth century, and most probably in 13U0, or in 1307 
 before the accession of Edward II. 
 
 It remains that we should add a few words on the occurrence 
 in this window of an eagle with two heads, and another with one 
 head only, both sa. on a field or. We do not think that any 
 difference of opinion as to their application can affect the con- 
 clusion at which we have arrived respecting the date of the 
 glass, and we hope to show good ground for believing them to 
 have been meant for the arms of an Emj^eror of Germany and 
 
278 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 a King of the Eomans ; tliough it is generally supposed that 
 this application of these two heraldic forms of the eagle is not 
 older than the beginning of the fifteenth century, and that the 
 two-headed eagle was not used by the Western Emperors till 
 Wenceslaus (1378-1400). German writers, as Gudenus and 
 Getter,^ state positively that an eagle with two heads occurred 
 on some of the seals of the Emperors Charles lY. and Wen- 
 ceslaus, but do not specify them. It is not to be found on any 
 of their seals engraved by Yredius, nor have we met with a 
 representation or description of such a seal. According to 
 Getter, this device was in use long before it appeared on any 
 seal, and it originated in the junction of the eagle of the king- 
 dom of Germany with that of the Empire, in the manner called 
 by heralds dimidiation. Among the arguments to prove that 
 it was the ensign or banner of the Empire in the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries, he has quoted passages from writers of 
 those times, where the plural, aquilce, is supposed to have been 
 applied to it. Gne instance is from a letter of our Queen 
 Eleanor in 1193 to Pope Celestine, invoking his influence for 
 the liberation of her son King Richard,^ where she says, *' Christi 
 crux antecellit Csesaris aquilas;" but this may admit of a dijBferent 
 interpretation. Whatever may have been the origin of the 
 device, an eagle with two heads is found on two gold coins of 
 Louis of Bavaria, as emperor, whose accession was in 1314 ; 
 and there is no reason to think this was the first use of it, 
 though no earlier example has. come down to our times. Two 
 seals of his sons, William and Albert, are engraved by Yredius, 
 which have their arms on an eagle with two heads, in accordance 
 with an occasional j)ractice of the sons of emperors showing their 
 connection with the Empire by placing their arms on an eagle. 
 Coins or medals {numi) of the Empresses Elizabeth and Katherine, 
 the wives of Albert I. and Henry YII., are said to have on them 
 the double-headed eagle,^ but of these we have seen no example. 
 The earliest instance that we have discovered of the two-headed 
 eagle being attributed to the Emperor, and the eagle with one 
 head to the King of the Romans, is in a MS. in the Harleian 
 collection,'' which purports to be a copy of a Roll of Arms t. 
 Henry III. The original unfortunately is lost. The occasion 
 of its compilation it is not easy to conjecture. The MS. com- 
 
 ' Oetter,Wappenbelustigung, 1, stuck, been able to meet with. 
 s. 117, aud, as there cited, Gudeni " Rymer, vol. i. p. 58. 
 Sylloge, var. diplom., p. 19. The work ^ Heineccius de Sigillis, p. 11; 
 of Zyllesius, also referred to, I have not ■* J^o. G589, towards the end. 
 
AISLE OF TIIK XAVK OF YORK CATIIEOIIAL. IM) 
 
 prises foreign and English coats, and bt^gins, " L'Emperenr do 
 Almaine d'or nng eglo cspany ove denx testes sable ;" next comes 
 the Emperor of Constantinople ; and then " Le l\oy de Almaine^ 
 d'or un egle displaye sable ; Le l\oy d'Engleterre gnles a trois 
 leopards d'or ; Le l\oy de France d'azure seme de (a lys is here 
 sketched) or." The copyist has probably modernised some of 
 the spelling according to the usage of his day. The arms 
 of England, it will be observed, are the same that were borne 
 before those of France were cpiartered with them in 1339 or 
 ir)40 ; and those of France are what were borne before the fleurs- 
 de-lys were reduced to three by Charles VL As the copy of 
 this roll contains as many foreign as English coats, it is hardly 
 practicable to verify the whole ; but we may mention, as indi- 
 cations of an early date, that, while we have remarked in it 
 notliing which requires it to be referred to a period later than 
 the thirteenth century, the arms of the Count of Hainault are 
 " cheveronnee de or et de sable," the ancient coat which was 
 discontinued before 1300 ; the arms of the Earl of AVarwick are 
 " eschekere d'or et d'azure un cheveron d'ermin," the old coat of 
 Newburgh, the last earl of which family died 1242 ; those of 
 the Earl of Pembroke are '' party d'or et vert un icon rampant 
 gulez," the arms of Marshal, the last earl of which family died 
 in 1245; those of the Earl of Albemarle are "gules un crois 
 patee de veire," last borne probaby by the earl who died in 1259 ; 
 and those of the Earl of Winchester are " gules poudre a faux 
 losengez d'or," for those of De Quincy, the last earl of Avliich 
 family died in 1264. The coat of Geoli'rey de Segrave is *' sable 
 a trois garbes d'argent," which we learn from the Siege of Car- 
 laverock had been abandoned for a Hon by the fiither of the 
 Nicholas Segrave there mentioned. Several of the English 
 names are the same that are in the Eoll t. Henry III., published 
 by Sir Harris Nicolas, and probably the lioll under considera- 
 tion is not much later than that. There is a very inaccurate 
 copy of it, evidently from another exemplar, printed in Leland's 
 ' Collectanea,' ii. p. GIO."^ 
 
 ' It may be needless to mention that blazoned later by different persons. "We 
 
 the King of Germany and the King of must not fail to notice that in the Roll t. 
 
 the Romans were the same person. In Edward III., published in Collectiiuea 
 
 like manner the Emperor of Germany Topog., vol. ii. p. 3'2o, an eagle is attri- 
 
 was styled Emperor of the Romans. buted to the Emperor without any men- 
 
 2 It is not improbable that in the tion of its having two heads, showing 
 
 oi-iginal Roll the arms were drawn and that in this country the notions on the 
 
 coloured, and that they have been subject were by no means uniform. 
 
280 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NOKTH 
 
 The Roll above described is not tlie only other early instance 
 of the two-headed eagle for Germany found here. Among the 
 various pavement tiles in this country which are usually ascribed 
 with considerable probability to about 1300, occurs an eagle 
 displayed, generally with one head, but occasionally with two 
 heads. These tiles have been referred with good reason to 
 Richard King of the Romans, who died in 1272 ; he was the 
 brother of Henry III., and father of Edmund Earl of Cornwall, 
 who succeeded him in that earldom, and died in 1300. Both 
 Richard and his son were lords of the manor of Woodpery, Ox- 
 fordshire, and a tile of that period, having on it an eagle dis- 
 played with one head, was found on the site of the old church 
 there, associated with another bearing a lion rampant, a device 
 also referable to him, it having been borne gu. crowned or on a 
 field arg. "with a bordure sah. bezanty, both by him and his son 
 as Earls of Cornwall. In Oxford cathedral were tiles of corre- 
 sponding date, bearing respectively an eagle displayed with two 
 heads, a lion rampant, and the arms of England; and at Dure- 
 lord Abbey, Sussex, and at Warblington church, Hants, were 
 an eagle displayed with two heads, and a similar two-headed 
 eagle, having on its breast an escutclieon charged with a lion 
 rampant, intended doubtless for the arms of Edmund Earl of 
 Cornwall, who bore the above-mentioned coat, a lion rampant 
 crowned within a bordure bezanty, upon an eagle displayed, as 
 appears by his seal engraved by Sandford, to show his descent 
 from a King of the Romans. The omission of the crown and 
 bordure is by no means conclusive against the arms on tliis tile 
 having been intended for his ; since in heraldry on tiles such 
 omissions are not unfrequent, especially when, as in this case, 
 the whole design is on a single tile about five inches square. 
 Richard, though crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle, was never Emperor, 
 for, as wrote Martinus Polonus, in the thirteenth century, of Con- 
 rad L, " inter imperatores non numeratur, quia non imperavit 
 in Italia;" but as both these eagles were known in England 
 about 1300, and regarded as devices having some relation to the 
 kingdom or empire of Germany, and the appropriation of that 
 with two heads to the Emperor, and that with one only to the 
 King of the Romans, had certainly not become general even in 
 Germany, it is not surprising that sometimes one and some- 
 times the other should have been used here for the eagle of 
 the King of the Romans by the manufacturers of tiles, whose 
 heraldry was never very exact. There have also been discovered 
 in distant parts of the country certain weights, externally of 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YOKK CATIIEDIJAI.. '-^"^1 
 
 brass, marked with a (.louble-hoaded cai^le, and either the arms 
 of Enixhind without the quarteriiiLr of France, or a lion rampant.' 
 These have been referred, and apparently with considerable 
 reason, to the time of Henry 111., and the eagle attributed to 
 Richard King of the Komans. 
 
 So much has been written on the origin and antiquity of the 
 two-headed or double eagle, especially in Germany, that our 
 limits will not admit of our even referring to the principal pub- 
 lications in which the subject is discussed.- But we have not 
 found it noticed that some of the earliest, if not the earliest, 
 well-authenticated examples of such an eagle are on Saracenic 
 coins, viz., a coin of Emad-ed-din Zeugi, a ruler of Aleppo, a.d. 
 1184-5; a coin of Es-salah Mahmud, Ortokite prince of Caifa, 
 A.D. 1216-7 ; and another coin of the same prince as ruler of 
 Amid, A.D. 1218. The dates are given on the coins themselves 
 in the years of the Hegira. These numismatic evidences are in 
 the British Museum, and for the reference to them we are in- 
 debted to Mr. W. S. AV. Vaux. An instance of a two-headed 
 eagle is said to have been found on the shield of a soldier among 
 the sculptures upon the column of Antoninus, but it rests on 
 authority that requires confirmation. It is not to be supposed 
 such a solitary and almost unobserved example should have led 
 to the adoption of a like form of eagle by the Emperor of Ger- 
 many. Those coins seem to render it not improbable that the 
 form was derived from the East in one of the Crusades ; but the 
 subject is involved in a mystery which does not seem likely to 
 be ever dispelled. 
 
 Note. — At the begiuniug of the preceding Memoir the heraldry in the other 
 windows of the nave was mentioned as justifying a confident opinion, that 
 the window above described is the earliest of those which are heraldic in that 
 part of the cathedral. It may not, therefore, be considered irrelevant to our 
 subject, or without interest to our readers, if we subjoin a brief notice of the 
 arms and heraldic devices in early glazing that remain in all the windows of 
 the aisles and cleiirstory of the nave. Some of the heraldry was found diflicult 
 to be made out from below, even with a telescoi^e; of this a close insix?ction 
 alone would have enabled us to speak ix)sitively. Drake has a jjlate (opix)site 
 J). 535), probably from some herald's notes, that purports to give all the aims 
 which in 1G41 were remaining in these and the other windows of the cathedral, 
 but does not state the particular windows in which they were found. While 
 
 ' See Archa;ologia, vol. XXV. pi. Ixiv.; Empire, and the distinction between the 
 
 Archicol. Journal, vol. ii. p. 203. Empire and the kingdom of Guruiany, 
 
 - One of the most curious is Getter's which iu his opiuioji led to the miion of 
 
 Wappeubelustigung, Augsburg, 17GI, 1, two eagles, are very fully investigated, 
 
 stuck, in which the origin and history and the opinions of numerous writers 
 
 of the double-headed eagle, or, as he ou these subjects are quoted and dis- 
 
 would have it, the double eagle of tlie cussed. 
 
282 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN THE NORTH 
 
 several seem to have disappeared, others are unaccountably omitted; a few 
 perhaps may be incorrectly engraved. For the convenience of reference, we 
 will take the windows in order from east to west. 
 
 Of the windows in the north aisle, which are all of three lights each, the first 
 has been fully described above. The second has no heraldry. The third has 
 the middle light bordered alternately with three lions of England on a red 
 ground, and semy of yellow fleurs-de-lys on a blue ground, for England and 
 France; and in the tracery, at two places, is a yellow castle on a red ground, 
 for Castile. The fourth has each of the two side lights bordered alternately 
 with a white lion rampant on a red ground, for Mowbray, and three red chev- 
 ronels on a yellow ground, for Clare ; the middle light is bordered alternately 
 with three lions of England on a red ground, and three yellow crowns on a blue 
 ground, probably for St. Edmund. The fifth has no heraldry. The sixth has 
 the middle light bordered with yellow fleurs-da-lys on a ground per pale red 
 and blue ; and on a shield in each of the side lights at the top is gu. two swords 
 in saltire, the hilts upwards, for St. Paul ; the tracery has in two places a yellow 
 fleur-de-lys on a red ground. The seventh has no painted glass. 
 
 Of the windows in the south aisle, which all consist also of three lights each, 
 the first has each of the two side lights bordered alternately with yellow covered 
 cups on a green ground, and white castles on a red ground, probably for Galicia 
 and Castile ; in the east side light at the top is a shield with England a label 
 arg., Thomas of Brotherton, a younger son of Edward I., born in 1300; in the 
 middle light at the top another shield with vert, a cross gu., which is false 
 heraldry, probably due to a repair with old glass, having been originally St. 
 George ; in the west side light at the top another shield Avith gu. three lions 
 passant guardant in pale arg., no doubt for England, the lions arg. being pro- 
 bably due to an omission of the yellow stain, or to a repair ; unless the coat 
 were for Giffard, whose lions were not guardant. The second has no heraldry. 
 The third has four shields of arms, viz., at the top of the middle light England 
 a border arg., Edmund of Woodstock, another son of Edward I., born in 1301, 
 and at the bottom az. a leopard rampant guardant between several fleurs-de- 
 lys arg., Holland; in the middle of the east side light harry of 8 gu. and or, 
 an old coat, but too small for the place, and no doubt an insertion (Drake gives 
 from the chapter-house barry of 8, or and gu., which he attributes to FitzAlan) ; 
 and in the middle of the west side light England within a border az. ; as no 
 such coat is known, we presume the border is a repair with old glass (Drake 
 gives such a coat as existing in 1641). The fourth has five shields of arms, 
 viz., in the middle light at the top England ; in the east side light at the top 
 quarterly 1 and 4 gu. a castle or, and 2 and 3 (clearly a later insertion) az. 
 a dolphin embowed arg., no doubt originally Castile and Leon, and in the 
 middle of the same light oz. semy of sprigs (leaded in) arg. a maunch gu. 
 (Drake gives a coat vair, a maunch gu., which is Mauley), and below is a modern 
 coat ; in the west side light at the top France semy, and in the middle of the 
 same light or a bend apparently gu. (such a coat was borne t. Edward H. by 
 Sir Elys Cotel, but Drake gives, probably instead of this, or a bend sa&., another 
 Mauley). The fifth has in the tracery two yellow keys in saltire on a red 
 ground, for St. Peter. The sixth and seventh have no heraldry ; indeed the 
 latter has no painted glass. 
 
 The west window of the nortli aisle and the west window of the south aisle 
 have each three lights, and exactly the same heraldic devices, namely, the side 
 lights are each bordered alternately with yellow castles and 3'ellow eagles dis- 
 l)laycd, separated by a ground per pale green and red, most likeh^ for Castile 
 
AISLE OF THE NAVE OF YORK CATIIEDnAL. 283 
 
 and Gavaston; of the tracery lights two are bordered in Hke manner, another 
 has, instead of the castles and eagles, 3'ello\v crowns, probably for St. Edmund, 
 and another has a lion of England on a red ground. The great west window 
 of the nave, which is of eight lights, has one of the middle lights bordered with 
 yellow crowns, the other with lions of England. The contract for glazing this 
 window was in 133S. 
 
 The clearstory windows are eight on each side, and have five lights each . 
 The heraldry in them consists exclusively of shields of arms. For convenience 
 of reference these windows will be taken also in their order from east to west, 
 and the lights numbered from the spectator's left. 
 
 Of the windows on the north side of the clearstory the first has 1. ix)ssibly 
 sab. a lion rampant arg., Verdon, but the field is obscure; 2. England; 3. 
 blank ; 4. "Warenne ; 5. az. three chevronels braced or a chief gu.j FitzHugh. 
 The second has 1. Valence ; 2. England ; 3. blank ; 4. or a cross, probably 
 sab., Yescy ; 5. arg. a canton gu., an old coat of Clare, which became part of the 
 label of Lionel Duke of Clarence a few years later. The third has 1. England 
 within a bordure of France, John of Eltham, son of Edward II., born 1315 and 
 died 133G; 2. gu. a lion rampant cmj., Mowbray; 3. England; 4. ga. a cross 
 incline erm., Beke, Bishop of Durham (Drake ascribes it to Paganel) ; 5. blank. 
 The fourth has 1. i^r cross gu. and vair a bend or, Constable; 2. England ; 3. 
 blank; 4. gu., three water-bougets arg., Eos; 5. or a fess between two chev- 
 ronels gu., Fitz Walter. The fifth has 1. blank; 2. Warenne; 3. England; 
 4 and 5. blank. The sixth has 1. per cross or and gu.. on a bend sab. three 
 escallops arg., Eure (Sir John was Sherifi" of Yorkshire 1309, 1310); 2. az. a 
 chief indented or, Saunders or FitzRanulph ; 3. England; 4. gu. a saltire arg., 
 Neville ; 5. gu. a lion rampant or, FitzAlan (we observe no billets, but Drake 
 gives the field gu. billety or, and attributes the coat to Bulmer). The seventh 
 lias 1. blank ; 2. gu. three escallops arg., Dacre ; 3. England ; 4 and 5. broken. 
 The eighth has no painted glass. 
 
 Of the windows on the south side of the clearstory the first has 1. arg. a 
 maunch sab., Hastings (Sir Balph was Governor of York Castle in 1337, and 
 Sheriff of Yorkshire in 1337-8); 2. or a fess dancetty sab., Vavasour; 3. arg. 
 six bars (or three bars gemelles) gu. on a canton sab. a cross patonce or, Etton ; 
 4. az. three crowns or, St. Edmund ; 5. or a cross patonce sab., a modern copy 
 of an old coat, Sampson (Sir John was Mayor of York 1299 and 1300). The 
 second has 1. or a fess dancetty sab. (modem), Vavasour ; 2. Clare ; 3. &)' a lion 
 rami ant "^m Tercy ; 4. England (modern) ; 5. or a bend sab., Sir Peter Mauley. 
 The third has 1. or a bend sab. as last mentioned ; 2. England ; 3. or on a bend 
 sab. three dolphins arg.. Sir John Mauley ; 4. or on a bend sab. three eagles 
 displayed arg.. Sir Kobert Mauley ; 5. modern coat. The fourth has 1, 2, 3, 
 and 4 too mutilated to be made out ; 5. England : it seems probable from 
 Drake's plate that in this window were the anns of Gavaston. The fifth has 
 
 1. chequy or and az. a fess gu., Cliflbrd ; 2. apparently or a fess gu. between six 
 torteaux (but possibly the coat given by Drake as or two bars gu. in chief three 
 torteaux. Wake); 3. England ; 4 as 2 (unless it be the coat given by Drake 
 as or a fess gu. in chief three torteaux, Colville) ; 5. broken. The sixtli has 1. 
 az. across patonce or, Warde (Sir Simon was Sheriff of Yorkshire 1316-21 ; but 
 possibly the coat which is given by Drake as sab. a cross patonce or, La.scells) ; 
 
 2. arg. a bend between six martlets gu., Furnival (possibly the same which 
 Drake has given as arg. a bend sab. between six martlets of the last, TemiX'st) ; 
 
 3. England; 4. broken ; 5. apparently per fess or and gu., in chief twofleurs-de- 
 iys, and in base two or more c<>unterchanged (but this probably is the same 
 
284 ON AN HERALDIC WINDOW IN YORK CATHEDRAL. 
 
 whicli is given by Drake as or on a fess between three fleurs-de-lys yu. two 
 others of the field, Deyville). The seventh has 1. az. a fess between three 
 fleurs-de-lys 07% Hoke (Sir William was Sheriff of Yorkshire 1305-7) ; 2. a 
 modern coat ; 3. England ; 4. az. three crescents or, Ryther ; 5. broken. The 
 eighth has no painted glass. In one of these windows on the south side of the 
 clearstory, but we cannot now say which, is the following coat much mutilated : 
 or on a fess between two chevronels gu. three mullets arg., Sir Walter Tyes, 
 who died s. p. in 1324. 
 
 We have blazoned the preceding coats as they appeared by the aid of a tele- 
 scope. It will be observed that in several instances they differ from those given 
 by Drake which there is reason to think were intended for the same. The 
 variances may perhaps be accounted for sometimes by repairs with old glass 
 since 1641, and sometimes by a difference of opinion as to the colour of the 
 glass, which in many places appears very dirty. In two cases he has given sah. 
 where we have noted gu. ; which may be due to the charges having been of red 
 glass covered with enamel brown to make it opaque, and the enamel having 
 partially come off so as to make the glass now appear a dirty red. The instance 
 in which he has given the field sah. where wo have it az. may perhaps be due 
 to a similar cause. These, however, are questions which a close and careful 
 examination of the glass could alone satisfactorily determine. 
 
 We must not leave this subject without mentioning that some of the glass 
 in the tracery of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th windows on the north 
 side of the clearstory, and in four of those on the south side, is very old, pro- 
 bably of the twelfth century ; a portion of it is engraved in Browne's ' York 
 Cathedral,' pi. cxxiii. It may have formed part of the glazing of the windows 
 of the nave which existed previously to the erection of the present. 
 
 Supplementary Note from the ' Archaeological Journal,' vol. xx. p. 330 : — 
 " In the window called the ' Bell-founder's window,' the next window to the 
 one described [in the preceding memoir J, is the representation, in the lower part 
 of the central light, of a figure in civil dress, kneeling before an archbishop who 
 is nimbed and seated on a throne. Over the head of the kneeling figure is a 
 scroll inscribed * Richard Tunnoc ;' and at the bottom of the window are the 
 remains of an inscription, very much mutilated, in which the following words 
 are legible : ' Richard . . . noc me fist . . ,' I have been informed by my 
 friend Rev. J. Raine, the biographer of the Archbishops of York, that in 1320 
 Richard Tunnoc was one of the sheriffs of York, and that there was a chantry 
 in the Minster, at the altar of St. Thomas of Canterbury, founded for the repose 
 of the soul of Richard Tunnoc, citizen of York." 
 
XTV. 
 AX ACCOUNT OF THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 i:ast amxdow of gloucestek cathedral. 
 
 (From the Archa?t)logical Journal, vol. xx. 186.''.) 
 
 
 ^B 
 
 ^^WW^^^^ 
 
 ^^S3 
 
 B 
 
 
 ■ "C 
 
 F it were possible for any one to suppose that Gotliio 
 arcliitecture was indigenous to tliese northern 
 regions, a glance at the windows of the earlier 
 buildings in the style might suffice to undeceive 
 him. The smallness and fewness of the openings, 
 and deep colours of the glazing, are alike sugges- 
 tive of a climate where a blazing sun exacts this 
 homage to his power. The instinctive desire, under 
 an obscure sky, for light, is exemplified by the increased size 
 given to the windows as the architecture gradually became accli- 
 matised, and by the diminution of their colouring. And after 
 Gothic architecture, in its turn, was superseded by another 
 exotic style better suited to modern wants, a happy appreciation 
 of the popular love of light cha,racterises the works of the 
 greatest of our national architects. Sir Christoplier Wren. 
 
 It is interesting to follow the progress of these changes, and 
 observe their relation to each other, in the medifeval styles of 
 tirchitecture and glass-painting.^ In the Norman style, and in 
 the earlier part of the Early English, whenever the use of much 
 white glass occurs, it should be regarded as a submission to dire 
 necessity. But the employment of white glass in largo quantity, 
 as a matter of choice, is observable in the latter part of th(.' 
 
 ' According to Rickman's nomencla- 
 ture, which seems as intelligible as any 
 that has since been inventetl, the Early 
 English style of architecture, which svic- 
 ceeded the Norman towards the last 
 quarter of the twelfth century, was in 
 its turn succeeded by the Decorated in 
 the last quarter of the thirteenth, and 
 this again by the Perpendicular in the 
 liist quarter of the fourteenth. 
 
 There is no style in painted glass 
 
 coeval with the Norman in architecture, 
 the glass found in Norman buildings 
 really belonging to the Early English 
 .''tyle of ghuss-puinting, which w;\s suc- 
 ceeded by the Decorated about r28o, 
 and that by the Perpendicular about 
 1 !80. The Cinquecento style in glass- 
 painting, which was concurrent for a 
 while with the Perpendicular in archi- 
 tecture, commenced about loOO, and 
 ended in 1. ')."»!». 
 
286 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 Early English period ; and it continued throughout the Decorated, 
 in an increasing ratio to the coloured. With the Perpendicular 
 style — the style of architecture which we in England associate 
 with the idea of 'Svalls of glass" — occurred a remarkable change 
 in the glass manufacture. The coloured glass was made less 
 deep, and generally speaking more even in tint, alterations 
 absolutely necessary to suit it to the more finished mode of 
 painting then adopted, and which culminated in the cinque- 
 cento ; and white glass, whiter than before, was used in in- 
 creasing profusion. The result is of course to occasion the 
 transmission of a greater amount of light through the glazing. 
 These changes were accompanied, at particular epochs, with 
 remarkable alterations in the details of the design ; peculiarities 
 on which the antiquary mainly relies as affording indications of 
 date, and which are nearly, but not strictly, synchronous with 
 changes in the corresponding details of the architecture — the 
 change in the architectural detail usually preceding by a few 
 years that in the painted glass. 
 
 A remarkable illustration of this fact is afforded by the great 
 east window of Gloucester cathedral, and its glazing. The 
 stone framework of the window is an early but decided example 
 of the Perpendicular style, and the painted glass is a pure 
 example of the Decorated. So pure is it indeed, that, but for the 
 incontrovertible evidence of date afforded by the heraldry in the 
 window, we should hesitate to proclaim it to be one of the latest 
 instances of the Decorated style of glass-painting. It presents 
 no feature really indicative of the great change of style which 
 was then imminent. Its material,^ its mode of execution, the 
 use of " smear-shading," ^ the forms of the hunan features, 
 especially of the eye and nose, all are such as any well-pro- 
 nounced specimen of the style exhibits. The general design, 
 too, of the glass-painting, though in some respects novel, is in 
 strict accordance with the rules of the Decorated style, and has 
 no resemblance to a Perpendicular example, except in the very 
 large proportion which the white glass in it bears to the coloured. 
 
 The design of the glass-painting will be more readily com- 
 
 1 The red used is the "streaked" and "stippled" shading is explained in 
 
 sort, which ceased to be manufactured the ' Inqiiiry into the Difference of Style 
 
 soon after the middle of the fourteenth observable in Ancient Glass Paintings, 
 
 century. The peculiarity of its appear- by an Amateur,' vol. i. pp. 16, 125. 
 
 ance is owing to the mode in which the The one is characteristic of the Deco- 
 
 metallic copper, its principal colouring rated, the other of the Perpendicular 
 
 material, is precipitated in the process. style. See also Archaeological Journal, 
 
 ^ The difference between "smear" ix. p. 47, and ante, p. 80. 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCKSTKIJ CAIMIKDHAL. 2S7 
 
 l^rolieinlcd hv ;i n^foreiico to tliat of the stoucwork, which is 
 shown by the ac('oiu|)aiiyin<; diaiiram (fii^. ]). 
 
 It will bo seen that there are towards the toj) of the central 
 portion of the window two tiers of lower lights more than in 
 the wings of the window. The space left blank in the diagram, 
 towards tlie bottom of tlie window, is occnpied partly witli solid 
 stonework, partly with lights open to the Lady Chapel, and 
 which never have been glazed.^ 
 
 The remains of the original glass plainly show that the tiers 
 of lights in the wings of the window, marked B b, bb, were 
 filled with patternwork principally of white glass, the lights 
 being glazed with white qnarries, each ornamented with a star, 
 and having a narrow edging on its two upper sides so arranged 
 as to form, w^hen the qnarries are placed together, a reticulated 
 pattern ; and being bordered with an ornamental pattern of 
 white and yellow foliage and flowers on a red ground. These 
 borders are cut through by the arched tracery bars shown in the 
 diagram. At present they pass into the spandrels of the lights 
 in the tiers A a, a a. It is more probable that these spandrels 
 were originally filled with ornamented quarries, like the spandrels 
 of the tiers b b, b B, c c, and the pierced transom which separates 
 these tiers. The lights in the tiers A a, a a, retain none of their 
 original glazing. It is most likely that they were treated in the 
 same way as the lights of the tiers B b, b b. 
 
 The lights of the tier c c were quarried and bordered precisely 
 in the same way as the lights in the tiers b b, b b. And they 
 were enriched by the insertion, in the upper part of the light, of 
 an ornamented panel containing a shield of arms, and, in the 
 lower part, of a small ornamented roundel. The original panels 
 remain in all the wing lights : in the centre lights they have 
 been destroyed, and in four of these lights a second row of 
 shields has been inserted at a late period. The loss of some 
 of the original shields from the centre of the tier is also to 
 be regretted. 
 
 The lights throughout the next tier, D d, are each filled with a 
 canopy enshrining a single figure. The canopy base serves as a 
 
 ^ In plan thi3 window forms a shallow second largest window in the kingdom 
 
 bay, its centre being slightly advanced which retains its original glazing. The 
 
 eastward, and joined with the wings at Gloucester window is about 72 ft. high 
 
 obtuse angles. Though the Gloucester and 38 wide, and the York window, 
 
 window is larger than the east window which is entirely glazed, about 78 ft. 
 
 of York Minster, yet, if we consider the high and 33 wide. The contract for 
 
 extent of the glazing, it is only the glazing the latter is dated 1-40'). 
 
288 
 
 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 FJC .3 
 
 /\^ FIG. I 
 
 53 
 
 ^^ ^^ ^^ '7X7^ ?^^ f^f^ f^f^ 
 
 54- 
 
 SS 
 
 56 
 
 57 
 
 62 
 
 63 
 
 64 
 
 66 
 
 
 nnnn nutm 
 
 B 
 
 a 
 
 [5. 
 
 
 B 
 
 i^^ Vy'^i^r^ vr^7^ 
 
 fT^ 
 
 m^ 
 
 £3 
 
 Diagram illusthativic of teie East Wr^^uow of Gloucester Cathedral. 
 
EAST WTXDOW OF (irorCKSTKll CATIIKDIIA L. 280 
 
 pedestal io the fiiifui-e, and oeeupies tlie entire width of the h'p^lit ; 
 a fact worthy of observation on account of tlie proof it affords 
 that tlie series of shrinework in the window, the j^osition of 
 wliich is indicated by the siiading in tlie diagram, was intended 
 to commence in this tier of lights, and not in any lower tier. 
 The canopy is of siin})le design, consisting of side jambs which 
 support a flat-fronted arched hood, surmounted with a tall 
 crocketed pediment terminating witlihi the light in a tinial. On 
 each side of the pediment is represented, in very strange per- 
 spective, the side of a part of a high-pitched roof which may be 
 supposed to run parallel with the front of the window, and to 
 cover the niches of all the canopies in this tier. The side jambs 
 do not terminate in this tier of lights, but proceed upwards, 
 without further interruption than that occasioned by their being 
 cut through by the stone framework, behind whi(;h they appear 
 to pass, into the lights of the next tier; tlirough which they 
 a2:ain iiroceed, and so on, until those in the win<2: liahts terminate 
 in finials in the tiers f f, f f, and those in the centre lights in 
 the tier H H. The side jambs support, in each of the lights of 
 the tier E e, a flat-fronted arched canopy hood, surmounted with 
 a high crocketed pediment, which terminates in a finial in the 
 centre light of the ])ierced transom above ; and in each of the 
 lights of the tier F F, F F, a flat-fronted arched canopy hood 
 surmounted with a high crocketed pediment, behind which rises 
 a lofty crocketed spire, terminating within the light in a flnial. 
 In like manner, in each of the lights of the central tier gg, is 
 supported a canopy hood, the spires and pinnacles of which 
 a-scend into the lights of the tier H ii, which they occupy, and 
 where they terminate. 
 
 As before mentioned, each canopy, pediment, and spire ter- 
 minates in a finial. But from behind each of the pediments in 
 the tiers D D, E E, and of the spires in the central tier F f, there 
 issues a shaft, which proceeds upwards into the light immediately 
 above, where it finishes in a bracket, having no connexion with 
 the canopy jambs, and which serves as a pedestal for the figure 
 in that light. Thus the figures in the tier E E stand u})on 
 brackets ultimately supported by the pediments in the tier i) d ; 
 those in the tier F f, f f, upon brackets virtually sustained by 
 the pediments in the tier E E ; and those in the tier G G ui)on 
 brackets sui»ported in like manner by the .spires in the centre 
 tier F F. But the spires in the wing tiei*s F f and ff, and in 
 the centre tier ii ii, are not surmounted with any shafts; which 
 shows clearly that the termination of th<' shrinework in these 
 
 r 
 
290 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 tiers of lights is original. In corroboration of tliis I may add 
 that the heads of the lights in the wing tiers F F and F F, and in 
 the centre tier h h, are, alone of the liglits containing the shrine- 
 work, each bordered with a nai-row strip of plain white glass. 
 
 The shrine work is entirely, and the figures are almost entirely, 
 composed of white glass, enriched w^ith the yellow stain. It, as 
 well as the figures, is backed with red and blue glass in alternate 
 vertical stripes. The colours of the stripes are denoted in the 
 diagram by the direction of the diagonal lines of the shading. 
 The shading from left to right indicates red, — that from right 
 to left, blue. 
 
 It will be perceived that the centre stripe occupies the space 
 of two lights, and is red, and that the other stripes are of the 
 width of one light apiece, and alternately blue and red. The 
 general effect of the window is that of a series of white canopies 
 and figures upon a coloured ground. The continuation of the 
 same colour perpendicularly alike through the spire-grounds and 
 niches of the canopies, imparts breadth to the design, whilst 
 monotony is prevented by the alternation of the red and blue 
 stripes ; and great point and prominence are given to the centre 
 of the design by the double width of the middle stripe, and its 
 red colour. 
 
 The remains of the glazing of the tracery lights show that 
 this portion of the composition was formed of a pattern of white 
 glass, enriched with a few coloured ornaments. The small holes 
 in the tracery are filled witli plain pieces of white glass, and the 
 other lights are bordered with plain strips of the same material, 
 and filled with white quarries ornamented like those in the lower 
 part of the window. The topmost light. No. 1, is now occupied 
 with the figure of a pope,^ and canopy, both of the fifteenth 
 century. In all probability this light was originally filled with 
 ornamented quarries, and it is not unlikely that it was enriched 
 as the lights Nos. 2, 2, are, with a large five-pointed flaming 
 star of yellow pot-metal glass, or some similar ornament. The 
 lights Nos. 3, 3, 3, 3, are each adorned with a small ornamental 
 roundel in white and yellow stained glass. 
 
 Thus the general design of the window may be divided into 
 three parts. The lower part, and top, consisting of a silvery 
 expanse of white ornamental work ; and the middle, of a grand 
 series of shrinework, rendered the more imposing by its towering 
 centre and bold horizontal summit. Though richly coloured, 
 
 ^ The figure wears a triple-crowned tiara, and holds a double cross. I suspect 
 it was brought from the Lady Chapel. 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATTIEDKAI, 291 
 
 especially towards tlie top, this part of the composition contains 
 so much white as to prevent its forming too decided a contrast 
 witli the rest of tlie window. The dispro[)ortion between the 
 white ornamented space below, and that above the shrinework, 
 which appears in the diagram, is in reality not felt, on account of 
 the partial obscuration of the lower part of the window by the 
 mass of the Lady Chapel ; and which, by varying the colours, 
 greatly increases the beauty and effect of the design. The Lady 
 Chapel that existed when the window was put up, though 
 smaller than tlie present, was large enough to have produced 
 a somewhat similar effect ; a circumstance which may have 
 determined the designers of the glass shrine work not to carry it 
 lower than the fourth tier of liglits from the bottom. 
 
 As a doubt of the originality of the present arrangement has, 
 however, been expressed, it is hoped that the following con- 
 siderations may assist in dispelling it. 
 
 The principle of filling the middle part of a window with 
 shrinework highly enriched with colour, and the upper and 
 lower parts with little else than wdiite iiatternwork, was too 
 commonly adopted throughout the Decorated period to render 
 it necessary to quote instances of the practice. And though 
 the elevating of the centre of the shrinework above its flanks, 
 as in this example, is as unique in this country as it is striking 
 and beautiful in effect, it should be recollected that similar 
 arrangements may be observed in Continental designs con- 
 temporaneous, or nearly so, with it. Again, the general arrange- 
 ment of the upper part of the design of the east window 
 harmonizes with that of the clearstory windows of the choii-. 
 These windows, five in number on each side, at present retain 
 sufficient fragments of their original glazing to indicate its 
 design. Each of these windows is divided by stonework into 
 two tiers of lower lights and a head of tracery. The four lights 
 of the lower tier each contained a figure^ and canopy, coloured 
 
 ^ Xo part of these figures remains, f f, f f of that win«lo\v, being, liovvevcr, 
 
 ■which prevents the fact of any removals somewhat shorter than the hitter ; they 
 
 thence into the east window (however are also about 3 in. wider than the 
 
 probable) being tested by admeasure- widest lights of the east window, i.e. 
 
 ment. l*arts of no less than six figures, the six central lights. They, therefore, 
 
 coeval with the glass in the clearstory, may be conceived to have originally 
 
 may be seen, as insertions in the lower contained figures somewhat larger than 
 
 part of the east windtjw of the La<ly those in any part of the e.ist window. 
 
 Chapel. The lights of the lowest tier The corresponding lights in the fifth 
 
 in the four windows on each side of cleai'story window on each side arc of 
 
 the clearstory next the e.xst window, the same width as the central lights of 
 
 range nearly with the lights of the tier the east window. 
 
 u2 
 
292 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 probably like those in the east window, but tlie rest of the 
 window Avas filled with pattern work, composed almost entirely of 
 white glass ; each light of the upper tier being glazed with 
 white ornamented quarries, and enriclied wdth two ornamental 
 roundels of white and yellow stained glass, or with two small 
 coloured panels of ornament. It is true that these lights were 
 furnished with borders, like those in the lower tiers of the east 
 window, c c, &c., on a red ground ; but the greater size of these 
 lights, compared with any of those in the tracery of the east 
 window, rendered this slight addition of colour necessary to 
 prevent poverty of effect. The tracery lights of the clearstory 
 windows were, like the tracery lights of the east, bordered only 
 with plain strips of white glass, and filled with ornamented 
 quarries, and a small roundel of white and yellow stained glass 
 was inserted in each of the two principal tracery lights of each 
 window. 
 
 Moreover, all the little pieces of plain white glass which, as 
 before mentioned, fill the triangular and other small openings in 
 the tracery of the east window, were, until the recent re- 
 building of the stonework, undoubtedly in situ : a circumstance 
 of itself sufficient to prove that the upper part of the window 
 always had a white ground. The glazing also of such of the 
 tracery lights as were coeval with the stonework had been formed 
 exactly to fit the openings, and the glass had always been cut 
 with the grozing iron, and not with the diamond, and was 
 universally retained in leadwork of the same age as the glass. 
 
 These facts cannot reasonably be reconciled wdth the theory 
 that the glazing of the tracery lights has been transferred from 
 the lights at the bottom of the east window, which, as before 
 remarked, have lost their original glass, or indeed from else- 
 where. 
 
 Features occur in the east window which certainly evince a 
 desire to avoid unnecessary expense ; but this, as it seems to me, 
 proves only that our mediaeval ancestors were wiser men than 
 modern enthusiasts imagine them to have been. I allude princi- 
 pally to the simplification of the glazier's work in the heads of 
 the lower lights. This has been effected by making the outside 
 of tliC stone framework plainer than the inside, and fitting the 
 glass to the plainer openings. Fig. 2 represents an exterior 
 view of a column of lights, showing how much of the orna- 
 mentation that is visible from the inside is hidden by the glass 
 from a spectator on the outside of the building. The painted 
 glass borders in the foliated heads of the lights in the tiers A A, 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL. 293 
 
 A A, B B, B B, c c, do iiot coDforiii to tlio cuspidations, but each 
 follows the course of tlie i)laiu o^ee })aue], into wliich the p:hizinf^ 
 is tilted : so that the border, when seen from within, appears to 
 be cut and partially hidden by the cuspidations which are before 
 it. Again, instead of the openings in the transom, which is 
 immediately above the liglits of the tier E e, being glazed 
 separately, the topmost glazing panel of the light beneath is 
 prolonged ujnvards, and fitted into the square-headed panel 
 shown in fiir. 2. Plain white lihxss is indeed used to cover those 
 portions of the stonework which are overlaid by the glazing 
 panel, as shown in fig. 3, where the shaded part represents the 
 painted glass, and the plain part the white. But if the intention 
 was not merely to economise the colouring material, but also to 
 allow of the stonework being seen from the outside, the latter 
 object has been frustrated by the strong local colour of the white 
 glass, which efiectually conceals the stonework. The same 
 principle of foiTuing a window-frame more ornamented on the 
 inside of the glass-line tlian without is partly adopted in the 
 great west window ; and I should not have alluded to the 
 circumstance, if it, and a certain awkward finishing of the shrine- 
 work in the wing lights of the tier F F, f F, had not been 
 adduced to prove that the original design of the window was not 
 fully carried out as intended. 
 
 The figures in the window have suffered severely, especially 
 those in the lights of the south wing. Scarcely one remains 
 entire; portions more or less important of the original glazing 
 having been lost, and supplied by glass of various dates, several 
 are reduced to little else than a mere conireries of frairments. 
 Seven figures, and parts of three others, may 1 think be pro- 
 nounced to be insertions, and presumed, with the exception of 
 one figure which is of later date, to have been taken from the 
 clearstory windows of the choir. 
 
 Enough, however, remains to indicate the nature of the 
 original design. Its leading subject was, the enthronement 
 of the Blessed Virgin. The principal group is placed in the 
 two central lights of the tier f f, f f, and was attended by twelve 
 apostles. The tier above, G G, was occupied w ith angels ; the 
 tier E E, with various saints ; and the tier D D, with iigures of 
 ecclesiastics, intermixed, perhaps, with tliose of one or two kings.' 
 
 ^ Some curious arrangements of apos- Art,' vol. i. p. 147, The following has 
 
 ties and saints, illustrative of the been supplied by the kindness of a 
 
 feelings of the times, are given in Mi*s. friend. 
 Jameson's work, ' Sacred and Legendary From S. Lorenzo fuori il Muro — 
 
294 PAINTED GLASS IN TEE 
 
 Of tlie angels, five remain in situ, as is indicated by their 
 attitudes, and the contrasting, in each case, of the colour of the 
 nimbus with the ground of the canopy niche. The figures are 
 arranged in pairs, looking or turned towards one another. Thus, 
 Nos. 5, 7, and 9 regard the south, and Nos. 8 and 10 (No. 6 is 
 a late insertion) the north. 
 
 The figure of the Virgin is placed in the light No. 17. It is 
 crowned, enthroned, and regards the figure of our Lord, which 
 occupies the adjoining light. No. 18. There is reason to believe 
 that this figure also, which now appears to be standing, was 
 enthroned. Of the apostles, St. Peter stands in the first place 
 of honour. No. 16 ; and St. Paul in the next. No. 19. Both are 
 turned towards the principal group. The two next figures, 
 St. John the Evangelist in No. 15, and St. Thomas in No. 20, 
 are turned from it, evidently for the sake of artistic effect. In 
 No. 14 St. Andrew is recognised by his cross, and in No. 12 
 St. James the Less by his club. Two other sainted personages, 
 similar in appearance to the rest, but without attributes, occupy 
 Nos. 11 and 13. These four figures are all turned towards the 
 principal group, and therefore regard the south. So far as we 
 have gone, all the figures in this tier may be considered to be 
 m situ. On the opposite side of the window, the feet only, and 
 part of the draperies, of two apostolic figures remain in the 
 lights Nos. 23 and 24, and in attitudes showing that the figures 
 to which they belonged must have been turned towards the 
 north. The figures of kings -in the lights Nos. 21 and 22, and 
 in the upper parts of the lights Nos. 23 and 24, are certainly 
 not in situ, nor do they appear to have belonged to this 
 window. 
 
 The figures in the two next tiers, E e and d d, were originally 
 arranged in the same way as the angels in the tier G G, in pairs, 
 looking or turned towards one another. I believe that all those 
 
 Pelagius, St. Lawrence, a Saint, Christ, Old Tribune, near the Lateran — St. 
 
 St. Paul, St. Stephen, a Saint, query Luke, St. Paul, Christ, St. Peter, St. 
 
 St. George ? All but the first are Andrew, 
 nimbed. Below— St. Barnabas, St. Thaddeus, 
 
 From the Lateran— St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, St. Matthew, St. Philip, St. 
 
 Virgin Mary, Christ, St. John Baptist, John, St. James, St. Bartholomew, 
 
 St. John Evangelist, St. Andrew. St, Thomas, St. Simon, St. Matthias, 
 
 Below in the same composition — St. St. Mark. 
 Jude, St. Simon, St. James (an ink- In Sta. Maria Trastevere— Innocent, 
 
 horn), St. Thomas, St. James (a book), Lawrence, Calixt\is, the Virgin, Christ, 
 
 St. Philip, St. Bartholomew, St. Mat- St. Peter, Cornelius, and some other 
 
 thew, St. Matthias. All these are legendary saints. 
 nimbed. 
 
KAST WINDOW or (1 LOUCKSTI'll CATIIKUKAI.. 295 
 
 ^vllic'll (xrupy the li«i;lits Nos. 25 to 3G iiiclusivo arc in situ, 
 Aiuongst them may be recognised St. Cecily, in No 25 ; St. 
 George, in No. 2(j ; St. Canute (?), in No. 28; St. ]\rargaret, iu 
 No. 29 ; St. Lawrence, in No. 30 ; and St. John 13ai)tist, in 
 No. 32. Of these ligures, Nos. 25, 27, &c., regard the south, 
 and the alternate ones the north. Subjected to the test afforded 
 by attitude, th(» figure in No. 37, which is turned towards the 
 north, is certainly not hi situ; and from the large size of the 
 heads, and other circumstances, I think that both this and 
 the next figure, No. 38, are insertions. 
 
 In the tier d d there is reason to believe that all the figures 
 are in situ, except those of kings in Nos. 46, 47, and 48. 
 
 Subjected to the test of attitude, the figure No. 40 is certainly 
 not in situ ; and its large size militates against its being con- 
 sidered an original one. The same remark applies to the figure 
 No. 47, as also to the upper part of the figure in No. 48, and 
 with the greater force, since in the lower part of this light may 
 be perceived the remains of an ecclesiastical figure, turned, 
 according to its right order, northwards. We have, therefore, 
 in the wing lights of this tier, proceeding in the same order 
 from the centre, a series of ecclesiastics, mitred, or bareheaded, 
 but all fully vested, and holding pastoral staves, or crooks ; the 
 mitred individuals occupying the lights Nos. 42, 40, 49, and 
 51 ; and the bareheaded, the alternate lights in the wings, and 
 Nos. 43 and 44 in the centre. It is impossible now to ascertain 
 to which class the remains of the figure at the bottom of the 
 light No. 48 belonged ; nor is it quite certain to which No. 44 
 originally belonged, the glazing round the indent of the head of 
 this figure not being trustworthy. But if No. 46 originally was 
 occupied with the figure of a king, and if the royal personage 
 represented in No. 45 is really in situ, we might, perhaps, con- 
 clude that the unity of the design was preserved by the figures 
 of two bareheaded ecclesiastics, occupying the lights Nos. 47 
 and 48. 
 
 I have hazarded no conjectural identifications of such figures 
 as are luidistinguished by symbols, distinctive habiliments, or 
 other attributes, and which, apparently, having been drawn 
 from one common model, exhibit but little individuality. Those 
 who are inclined to pursue the subject further will iind a fuller 
 description of the figures in the following catalogue, as well as 
 the reasons upon which this brief criticism has been principally 
 based : — 
 
29(j PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 5. An angel with a blue nimbus holding a palm-bvanch, and turned towards 
 he south. The wing is coloured in bars, the npper one being white, the 
 
 centre blue, and the end yellow. The hair of the head is stained yellow.^ 
 
 6. A little of the original canopy-work remains, but the rest of the glazing 
 belongs to the fifteenth century, and represents the Virgin and the Holy 
 Infant. The borders of the draperies have been ornamented with coloured 
 pieces of glass stuck on in the way recommended by the Monk Theophilus,^ 
 but these additions have fallen off. The crown on the Virgin's head might at 
 first be mistaken for one of classical character; its form is, however, due to the 
 ingenuity of some glazier in modern times, who has substitued points for the 
 original leaves round the circlet. 
 
 7. The remains of an angel, similar to No. 5 ; having a blue nimbus, and 
 turned towards the south. The figure has suffered much. Ilie head is of the 
 fifteenth century. 
 
 8. An angel, like No. 5, having a blue nimbus, and turned towards the 
 north. 
 
 9. An angel, like No. 5, having a red nimbus, and turned towards the 
 south. The head and upper part of this figure are of the fifteenth century. 
 
 10. An angel, like No. 5, having a blue nimbus, and turned towards the 
 north. 
 
 11. A male figure, having a blue nimbus, holding a book in the left hand, 
 and turned towards the south. 
 
 12. A male figure, having a red nimbus, and holding a club, the handle of 
 which is of yellow stained glass, and the end of blue glass. The figure is 
 turned towards the south, but the eyes regard the north. — St. James the 
 Less. 
 
 13. A male figure, having a blue nimbus, holding a book, and turned 
 towards the south. This figure is much mutilated. 
 
 14. A male figure, having a red nimbus, and pointing with the left hand to 
 an X cross, coloured green. The figure is turned towards the south, but the 
 eyes regard the north. — St. Andrew. . 
 
 15. A male figure, with a blue nimbus, holding a i)alni-branch in his left 
 hand, and with an eagle perched on his right, looking into his face. This 
 figure is turned, and looks towards the north. — St. John the Evangelist. 
 
 16. A male figure, having a light blue nimbus (the colour of the niche is 
 deep bhie diapered),^ and holding two keys in his right, and a model of a 
 church in his left hand. The figure is turned towards the south. — St. Peter. 
 
 17. A female figure, crowned, and having a blue nimbus, seated, and looking 
 towards the figure in No. 18. Though seated, it is as tall as the other figures 
 which stand erect. — The Virgin Mary. 
 
 ' When no colour is expressed, white ^ The ground of this entire column of 
 
 glass is to be understood. lights, viz., 16, 30, 44, is blue diaper, 
 
 2 See the translation of ch. xxviii. as was that of the colunui containing 
 
 of the ' Diversarura Artium Schedula, Nos. 19, 33, 47. The ground of the 
 
 of Theophilus, given in the ' Inquiry spires of the canopy of No. 47 is dia- 
 
 into the Difference of Style observable pered, but the ground of the niche is 
 
 iu Ancient Glass-paintiugs, by an Ama- not, a corroboration of the opinion 
 
 teur,' vol.i. p. 337, and note (k), p. 28, elsewhere expressed, that the figure in 
 
 ibid. The work of Theophilus is said this light does not belong to this 
 
 to have been written about 1220; see window. 
 Arch. Journ. vol. xix. p. 347. 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL. '21)7 
 
 18. A male figure, crownetl, and having a green nimbus, with a white cross 
 in it (the niche ground is red, and, unlike the otlier reil ground, is diajicred). 
 The mantle is fastened with a purple-coloured morse. The figure regards that 
 in Xo. 17. The right hand is raised in Ix'nediction ; no stigma is shown. The 
 left hand, lower jart of the body, and feet, have been lost, and the ground of 
 the lower half of the niche is not original. What remains of the drajHiry is 
 not inconsistent with the belief that the figure, when perfect, was seated. This 
 figure doubtless represented Our Lord. 
 
 19. A male figure, with a light blue nimbus (the niche ground is deep blue 
 diai)ered), holding a sword in tiie right hand, and a book in the left. The 
 face is lost. The figure is turned towards the north. — St. Paul. 
 
 20. A male figure, without a nimbus, the head draped and bearded, holding 
 a sjjear in the right hand, and a girdle in the left. The figure is turned 
 towards the south. — St. Thomas the Ajiostle, 
 
 21. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, and holding a sceptre ; no 
 nimbus. The lower part of the body is a mere mass of fragments. It is 
 turned towards the north, but, being of a larger scale than the other figures in 
 this tier, I cannot suppose it to be one of the original figures of the window. 
 
 22. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding a sword in the left hand. 
 The right is lost ; no nimbus. This figure is very much made up of frag- 
 ments ; it is apparently of the same scale as the original figures in the tier, and 
 is turned towards the north ; but 1 think it is an insertion. 
 
 23. In this light are the remaius^learly an insertion — of the upper half of 
 the body of a royal i)erson, crowned, holding a sword in the left hand, but 
 having no nimbus. The face is of the fifteenth century. The lower part of 
 the body is a mass of fragments, llie pedestal is lost, but its indent remains ; 
 and just above it are two naked feet and some drai^ery, whose attitude shows 
 that the figure to which they belonged — probably that of an apostle — was 
 turned towards the north. There is no douht but that this fragment is part 
 of an original figure. 
 
 24. This light also contains the upper half of a male figure, crowned, in 
 royal robes, holding a sceptre in the left hand, but having no nimbus, turned 
 towards the south, and of the same scale as Xo. 21, and clearly an insertion, 
 llie i>edestal remains, and one naked foot and some original drapery rest upon 
 it. From the position of the foot and drapery, it is evident that the figure 
 to which they belonged — probably that of an apostle — was turned towards the 
 north. There is no doubt but that this fragment is part of an original figure. 
 
 25. A female figure, with a blue nimbus, having a wTcath of red roses on 
 her head, and a book in her right hand. This figin-e is turned towards the 
 south. It is perhajjs the best drawn of the series. — St. Cecily. 
 
 2G. A male figure, turned towards the north ; in a plate skull-cap and 
 hauberk of mail, over which is a white cyclas, bearing a red cross, and lined 
 with green. On the hands are gauntlets of plate. The legs are in plate. The 
 spurs are rowclled. The figure holds a si)ear in the right hand, without a 
 ixjnnon. The left hand rests on the sword-handle. A dagger is place<l on the 
 right side, and a shield, white, with a red cross, hangs jjartly over the left side 
 and arm, suspended from the neck by a strap. Xo nimbus.' — St George. 
 
 * We have seen that St. Thomas is in a window at Aldwinckle St. Peter's, 
 
 alsio represented without a nimbus. It Nortliatnptousliire, with the name of 
 
 \\a.s not uncommon to omit the nimbus the sauit, however, written underneath, 
 
 from St. George. Such a figure occui-s Thi.s ghiss h of the time of Edw. II. 
 
298 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 27. A female figure, having a blue nimbus, and holding a book in her right 
 hand. The figure, which is much mutilated, is turned towards the south. 
 
 28. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding two arrows in the left 
 hand, and turned towards the north. No nimbus. The figure stands on a 
 piece of green turf overlying the pedestal. — St. Canute (?). 
 
 29. A female figure, as may be concluded from some tresses of hair which 
 lie on the shoulders. The face is lost. The figure, which has a blue nimbus, 
 and is turned towards the south, is treading upon a dragon, and presses down 
 a spear, which enters its mouth, and goes out at its neck. — St. Margaret. 
 
 30. A male figure, with a red nimbus, tonsured, in mass vestments, turned 
 towards the north, and holding a gridiron painted black. — St. Lawrence. 
 
 31. A female figure, crowned, holding a sword in the right hand, and a book 
 in the left, turned towards the south. No nimbus. — St. Catherine (?). 
 
 32. A male figure, with a blue nimbus, clad in a short white drapery, 
 fringed all round, and reaching to the calf of the leg. The legs and feet are 
 naked. The right hand is lost, the left remains ; it did once support some 
 tolerably large object (such as an agnus Dei), now lost. The figure, which is 
 turned towards the north, stands on a piece of green turf overlying the pedestal. 
 — St. John the Bai>tist (?). 
 
 33. The head of this figure is gone, and the whole body is shattered to 
 pieces. It has a red nimbus. Amongst the fragments are a left-hand glove, 
 holding what may have been a pastoral staff, and a right-hand glove i-aised in 
 benediction, as well as one foot, shoed. From the position of the hand holding 
 the staff, I conclude that the figure was turned towards the south. 
 
 34. This figure is also a mass of fragments. It has a blue nimbus. The 
 head is lost. Amongst the fragments are a left hand holding a sword, and a 
 right (neither is gloved) playing with the belt or girdle of the figure. From 
 the position of the hands, especially of the right, I conclude that the figure was 
 turned towards the north. The probability is that this and the former figure 
 are original. 
 
 35. Apparently a male figure. The. head is lost; it has a red nimbus. The 
 left hand is placed on the breast, the right supports a thick knotted staff or 
 club, coloured green. It is turned towards the south, and appears to be an 
 original figure. 
 
 36. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding a sceptre in the left 
 hand, and turned towards the north. The lower half of this figure is made up 
 of fragments. No nimbus. It appears to be an original figure. 
 
 37. The head of a male figure, wearing a patriarchal hat, coloured pink, in 
 the front of which has been inserted a small square piece of white glass, of the 
 fifteenth century, representing a head of Christ, with part of the nimbus. The 
 figure is a mere mass of fragments, and is a good deal shorter than the original 
 figures of this tier. From its looking towards the north, it cannot be in situ, 
 and, owing to the large scale of the head, I think it did not belong to this 
 window. It has no nimbus. 
 
 33. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes ; no nimbus. The whole, except 
 a small portion of the upper part of the body, and the feet, is made up of frag- 
 ments. The figure was turned towards the north, but, on account of its large 
 scale, I think it is not an original figure. 
 
 39. A male figure in mass vastments, tonsured, holding a pastoral staff in 
 its left hand, and turned towards the south. None of the figures in this tier 
 of lights has a nimbus. 
 
 40. A male figure, mitred, in mass vestments, the right hand in benediction. 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCKSTEIl CATIIEDIIAL. 21)9 
 
 the loft hoKiing a pastoral staff. The lower half of the figure is much iiuiti- 
 lateil. It is turiKH.1 towards the north. 
 
 41. A male figure, in mass vestments, tonsured, holding a pastoral staff in 
 the right hand, and a book in the left. The figure is turned towards the 
 south. 
 
 42. A male figure, mitral, in mass vestments, the right hand in benediction, 
 the left holding a pastoral staff. The figure is turned towards the north. 
 
 43. A male figure ; the head is of the fifteenth century, and it is im[)Ossible 
 to determine whether the original head was mitred. The figure is very much 
 mutilated. The fragments show that tlie remains are those of a figure turuetl 
 towards the south, supix)rting a pastoral staff with the right hand, and holding 
 a lK)ok in the left. 
 
 44. niis figm-e is a mass of fragments. The head is lost. The indent is 
 clearly tliat of a tonsured head, not mitred ; but as none of the original back- 
 ground remains, it is impossible to be certain of the originality of the indent. 
 Part of the collar of a coix), cro.ssed with a staff', as of a pastoral staff, remains, 
 from which it api>ears that the figure was turned towards the north. The 
 probability, therefore, is in favour of its being an original figure. The head of 
 the jiastoral staff, and the hand introduced as supporting it, are of the fifteenth 
 century. 
 
 45. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding a sceptre in the right 
 hand, and a mound surmounted with a very lofty cross in the left. Very 
 little of the original drai)ery below the waist remains. The space from the 
 feet to the knees is constructed of fragments. The figure is turned towards 
 the south. It is of the same scale as tlie original figures of this tier, and I 
 have no reason to suspect its not being one of them. 
 
 46. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes, holding three arrows in its left 
 hand, and turned, towards the south. The hands, face, and hair of this figure 
 are coloured pink, the hair being of a deei:>er tint than the countenance. As 
 this figure is half a head taller than any of those in this tier, it cannot belong 
 to it ; nor does its size admit of its having belonged to the window. 
 
 47. A male figure, crowned, in royal robes ; the right hand points to a 
 sceptre held in the left. Part of the white robe is made of spoiled or imi>erfect 
 ruby glass. The feet remain, but all above, to the middle of the figure, is a 
 mass of fragments. The figure is turned towards the south. It is of the 
 same scale as the last, and 1 think it does not belong to this window. 
 
 48. The upi)er half of this figure is made up of fragments. The face is lost, 
 but there is a crown over it, and a right hand holding a s}:>ear. The lower 
 fiart of the figure is that of an ecclesiastic in mass vestments, with a book in 
 the right hand, and a pastoral staff in the left. The i)Osition of the hands 
 shows that this figure was turned towards the north ; from which I conclude 
 that it was an original figure. I should add that the scale of the remains of 
 the upper figure might entitle it to be considered one of the original figures of 
 the window displaced. 
 
 49. A male figure, mitred, in mass vestments, the right hand in benediction, 
 the left holding a pastoral staff. The figure is turned towards the south. It 
 is much shattered. 
 
 50. A male figure, in mass vestments, tonsured, holding a jxistoral staff in 
 the right hand, and a book in the left. The figure is turned towards the 
 north. In the amice is inserted a piece of blue glass, round like a jewel, which 
 seems origiruil. 
 
 51. This figure is a mere mass of frajimonts, amoniist which mav be seen a 
 
300 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 mitre, turned towards the south, and a right hand, gloved, holding a staff, 
 probably a pastoral stafif. I believe that this, as well as the last, are the 
 remains of original figures. 
 
 52. This figure is so completely destroyed that the fragments of which it is 
 composed afi'ord no indication of what it may have been. 
 
 The heraldry to which allusion has been made consists of the 
 eight shields in the wings of the window, all which upon a 
 careful examination I believe to be in situ ; and of ten coats in 
 the centre lights. Of the last, those numbered 57, 62, 68, and 
 69, may be discarded, as being plainly of later date tlian the 
 rest of the glazing. The difficulty has been to determine 
 the originality of the remaining six coats. I have ari'ived at the 
 conclusion that of these only two, Nos. 60 and 70, form part 
 of the original series; Nos. 58, 61, and 67 belonging to an 
 earlier period, and No. 59 to a different set. But, as it is impos- 
 sible to express in writing those trifling peculiarities which 
 distinguish dates in painted glass, I must request the reader Avho 
 may be disposed to dissent from my opinion to suspend his 
 judgment until he shall have actually examined the glass him- 
 self. 
 
 53, (jfu. a lion rampant or ; Kichard Earl of Arundel. This 
 shield may be regarded as a fair type of the eight shields in 
 the wing lights. These shields are nearly of the same size, 
 varying in length from 13 J- in. to 14 in., and in breadth from 
 10 J in. to 11 in. They are on panels, each panel having 
 a white diapered ground, except. No. QQ, the ground of which is 
 light blue diapered ; a change of colour apparently dictated by 
 the white field of the shield. A small ornament, as before 
 mentioned, was inserted in the lower part of each of the lights. 
 Those now remaining are, in Nos. 53 and QQ, a double triangle ; 
 in 54, three white, and in bQ, three green leaves conjoined ; in 
 57, a double square ; in 62, a double rose ; in 63, a figure on a 
 red ground striking at a ball with a crooked stick ; and in 
 No. 64, a triangle interwoven with a trefoil. 
 
 54. Cru. a chevron (lost, but probably) arg. between ten 
 crosses patty arg.; Thomas Lord Berkeley. 
 
 bb, Gu. a fess between seven cross crosslets or; Thomas 
 Earl of Warwick. 
 
 56. This shield, which is upon a panel, is wholly made up of 
 fragments, amongst which may be observed part of a narrow 
 bend arg. charged with three mullets pierced gu., now placed in 
 pale ; and also some fragments on a diapered blue field. The 
 material used seems to be of the same date precisely as the ori- 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL. 301 
 
 2:inal glazinp: of the window. I am therefore disposed to tliink 
 tliat the shield to wliich tlie charge belongs was one of the 
 original series, and the Northampton coat, az. on a bend arg. 
 between two cotises and six lions rampant or three mullets gu ; * 
 William Earl of Northampton. 
 
 r)7. Arg. two bendlets indented^?/, and vert; Kuyhall.- TJiis 
 shield, which is not on a panel, is 15^ in. long and 10^ in. broad, 
 and therefore considerably exceeds any of the panelled shields in 
 size. It also greatly differs from them in shape. The texture 
 of its glass, the presence of smooth ruby, the style of its diaper, 
 the tenderness and want of precision of the painted lines, concur 
 in indicating a date as late probably as 1385. It clearly forms 
 no part of the original glazing. 
 
 58. Gil. three lions pa>sant guardant in pale or; King of 
 England. This shield, which is not on a panel, is only 13 in. 
 long and 10-V in. broad, and is therefore considerably smaller 
 than the panelled shields. The lions are drawn in a much 
 earlier style than those in Nos. 60 and 70, after described, from 
 which, and the circumstance that the coat is neither diiferenced 
 nor quartered with France, I conclude that it is of an earlier 
 date by several years than the panelled shields. 
 
 59. Quarterly, 1 and 4, az. semy of lis or, 2 and 3, England 
 (now lost and replaced with modern glass, representing or a bend 
 az.); King of England. This shield, which is not on a panel, is 
 iA^ in. long and 11 in. broad, and is therefore sensibly larger 
 than the panelled shields. The glass may be of the same date 
 as the original part of the window, but the size of the shield, 
 and the different character of the fleurs-de-lis, as compared with 
 those in Nos. GO and 70, strongly incline me to the belief that 
 the coat is not one of the original series. 
 
 GO. Quarterly, 1 and 4, az. semy of lis or, 2 and 3, three lions 
 passant guardant in ])ale or, a label arg.; Edward the Black 
 Prince. This shield, which is not on a panel, is 13^ in. long, 
 and 11 in. broad, and therefore agrees in size with a panelled 
 shield. The lions and fleurs-de-lis are drawn in precisely the 
 same style as those in No. 70, and the texture of the glass 
 is identical with that of the original part of the window. I 
 tliink it is one of the original coats. The quarterings of 
 
 ' The same coat formerly existed in Longdon, if I remember right, it was 
 
 the east window of Loiigdon church, shown by a bhick dot. 
 Staffordshire. In the Gloucester ex- - See Nash's 'Worcestei*sliire,' vol. ii. 
 
 ample, the eye or piercing of the mullets p. 8»5. 
 is denoted by a small bhick ring ; in the 
 
302 TAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 England are formed of plain pieces of yellow pot-metal glass, on 
 which the lions are painted in outline. Another example of 
 this very common practice of simplifying glazier's work is 
 afforded by No. 63. 
 
 61. G-u. three lions passant guardant or, a bend az. ; Henry of 
 Lancaster.^ 
 
 This shield, which is not on a panel, is only 12i in. long and 
 10 in. broad, and is therefore considerably smaller than the 
 panelled shields. The lions are drawn in a decidedly earlier 
 style than those in Nos. 60 and 70, and precisely resemble those 
 in No. 67. I think that the glass may be put as early as 1310 
 or 1315, and therefore that it forms no part of the original 
 glazing. 
 
 62. This shield, which is not on a panel, is made up of a coat 
 clearly of the fifteenth century, which exhibits the instruments 
 of the Passion, and partly of fragments added to make it of the 
 some size as the otlier shields. 
 
 63. Quarterly, 1 and 4, barry arg. and az. an orle of martlets 
 
 gu. 2 and 3, a maunche ; Lawrence, or John, E. of 
 
 Pembroke.^ The Hastings quarterings (properly, or a maunche 
 gu.) are formed of pieces of pot-metal yellow glass, on which the 
 maunche is drawn in outline. In the third quartering the field 
 is smeared over with brown paint. 
 
 64. G-u. a lion rampant and bordure engrailed or ; Gilbert, or 
 Richard, Lord Talbot. 
 
 65. Gu. a chevron erm. between ten crosses paty arg.; Sir 
 Maurice de Berkeley. 
 
 ' If I am right in my supposition as heir, who died in 1325, leaving Lawrence, 
 to the date of this coat, it would be that his son and heir, an infant. Being one 
 of Henry, son of Edmund Crouchback, of the coheirs of the last Earl, he was 
 Earl of Lancaster, borne during the declared Earl of Pembroke by Ed- 
 lifetime of his brother, Thomas Earl of ward III., while in Flanders, in October, 
 Lancaster, who was executed in 1321. 1339, which was a short time before 
 See Archaeological Journal, x. p. 329. that king quartered France and England. 
 
 2 This very early example of two The Earl appears to have soon followed 
 
 coats borne quarterly, viz. Valence and this example, and he placed the arms of 
 
 Hastings, deserves a passing notice. The Valence, like those of France, in the 
 
 grandson of Earl Lawrence is commonly first and fourth quarters, as the more 
 
 said to have been the first English sub- honourable coat. A yet earlier example 
 
 ject that bore such a coat. See, how- of a quarterly coat borne by an English 
 
 ever, Archaeological Journal, ii. p. 343. subject occurs in the roll of arms, t. 
 
 John de Hastings, the grandfather of Edw. II., that of Sir Simon de Montagu, 
 
 Earl Lawrence, married one of the being in modern blazon first and fourth 
 
 sisters and coheiresses of Aylmer de arg. a dance (or fess fusily) </w. ; second 
 
 Valence, Earl of Pembroke, and died and third arg. a griffin or. 
 in 1313, leaving by her a son, John, his 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER (WTIIEnnAL. 30r5 
 
 GO. Arg. on a quarter (ju. a rose or; Tliomas Lord 13ra- 
 deston. 
 
 ()7. Gru. three lions passant gnardant or, a label of France ; 
 Thomas Karl of Lancaster.^ 
 
 This shield, which is not on a panel, is only lo in. long and 
 10^ in. broad, and is therefore considerably smaller than the 
 panelled shields. The lions are drawn in precisely the same 
 style as those in No. 61, with which coat the present seems 
 coeval. It clearly forms no part of the original series. 
 
 6S. Quarterly. 1 and 4, az. semy of lis or, 2 and 3, gn. three 
 lions passant gnardant in pale or, a label of three points a?'(/., each 
 point charged with as many (circles in outline hatched with dark 
 lines, a common way of representing) torteaux; Edmund of 
 Langley, Duke of York, 1385-1402. 
 
 This shield, which is not on a panel, agrees in character in 
 every respect with the date above indicated, and clearly forms 
 no part of the original series. 
 
 G9. France and England quarterly ; King of England. 
 
 This shield, which is not on a panel, is of the same date as the 
 last, and forms no part of the original series. 
 
 70. Gu. three lions passant guardant or, a label of France ; 
 Henry Earl of Lancaster.^ 
 
 This shield, which is not on a panel, has lost part of its upper 
 edge ; but if completed,^ it would be of the same size as one of 
 the panelled shields. 1'he lions and fleurs-de-lis are drawn in 
 the same style, and the glass is of the same character, as 
 in Xo. GO. I believe that it is one of the original coats. 
 
 The date which I should feel obliged to assign to the glass- 
 painting in this window, upon a consideration of its style and 
 execution, irrespectively of the heraldry, would be some time 
 between 1340 and 1350> 
 
 ' See note to No. 61. it and the glass in the west window of 
 * He was only son of the Heniy of Winchester Cathedral is so maiked as 
 Lancaster whose coat I have supposed to make me desirous to put the one as 
 No. »J1 to be, and who was restored as early, and the other as late, as proba- 
 Earl of Lancaster in 1.VJ7. lie sue- bility will allow, I have reason to think 
 ceeded his father as Earl of Lancaster that the Winchester glass is the work 
 in i:i45, and was created Duke of Lan- of Bishop Edington, who died in 1 itjo 
 caster in i:)51, having been previously (see notice of the painte<l glass at Win- 
 created Earl of Derby in l:;:}7. Chester, in Proceedings of the Arcluco- 
 3 A consideration of tiie style and logical Institute, at their meeting there 
 supposed «late of <»ther painted windows in 184.'), p, .'>, and p. 05 of the present 
 would render it difficult to assign to the vulnuie). The style of this ghvss is 
 Gloucester glass a date later than 13o0. transitional, but it partakes much more 
 Indeed, the ditference of style between of the character of the glazing in New 
 
304 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 I propose now to inquire what more precise date is indicated 
 by these coats of arms. For this purpose we must devote our 
 attention exclusively to the original coats. Of these, which 
 were fourteen in number, it has been shown that there are ten 
 remaining, viz. those of the Black Prince ; Henry Earl of Lan- 
 caster ; Richard Earl of Arundel ; Thomas Lord Berkeley ; 
 Thomas Earl of Warwick ; William Earl of Northampton ; 
 Lawrence, or John, Earl of Pembroke; Gilbert, or Richard, 
 Lord Talbot ; Sir Maurice de Berkeley ; and Thomas Lord 
 Bradeston; and that all these are in situ, except those of the 
 Black Prince and the Earl of Lancaster. Of the four missing 
 coats no donbt that of Edward HI. (France and England 
 quarterly) was one. Yet it is evident that this was not a group 
 of the arms of the king and princes of the blood, and the nobles 
 allied to them, in the latter part of the reign of that sovereign, 
 such as occurs occasionally. Nor was it a group of the arms of 
 families in the county, or of any family and its alliances ; nor is 
 there any reason to suppose that they were the arms of some of 
 the principal benefactors to the abbey ; nor is it likely that 
 these noblemen would have joined in presenting this window, 
 and on that account have had their arms placed in it. They 
 are, in fact, the arms of a prince and certain noblemen renowned 
 for military talent and bravery, who distinguished themselves in 
 the wars in France under Edward III. ; and their coats were in 
 all probability displayed in this window to do them honour, or 
 to commemorate companionship in arms.^ Let us then proceed 
 
 College Chapel, Oxford, wliicli probably volved in the wmdow. 
 
 was put up between 1379 and 1386 (see ^ In the Scrope and Gz'osvenor Roll, 
 
 Archseological Journal, ix. p. 46, and p. we learn from two witnesses of the 
 
 146 of the present volume), than of the Hastings family examined 10 Rich. II., 
 
 Gloucester glass. The more exact date, that their grandfather had, sixty years 
 
 1347 or 1348, which the heraldry enables before, placed in a window in his own 
 
 us to assign to the Gloucester window, chapel the coat of Geoffrey le Scrope 
 
 is in most strict accordance with proba- because they had been fellow-soldiers, 
 
 bility, nor is it inconsistent with any The coats of other friends may have 
 
 of the ascertained dates of the building, been there also, but the object of the 
 
 It may be conceded that the east examination required only the mention 
 
 window was already glazed when Abbot of the Scrope arms. A more singular 
 
 Horton's work (consisting of the interior mode of manifesting friendship by 
 
 fittings of the clioir, see Professor Willis's means of heraldry appears in the evi- 
 
 eketch of the History of Gloucester dence of the Prior of Merton, examined 
 
 Cathedral, Archseological Journal, vol. in the same year. Sir Alexander de 
 
 xvii. p. 336) was begun, in 1368. To Neville, an uncle of the then Lord 
 
 my learned friend Mr. W. S. AValford Neville, had a surcoat or jupon {cote 
 
 my best acknowledgments are due for d'annes) embroidered with his own 
 
 the assistance he has afforded me in arms, and all the quarters filled with 
 
 dealing with the heraldic question in- small escutcheons of the arms of his 
 
i: AST WTXDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATIIEDKAL. '^05 
 
 to ascertain what wo may infer from these escutcheons as to the 
 time when this ghiss was executed. 
 
 John de Hastings, Earl of rembroke, succeeded his father 
 Lawrence in 1348, wlien only about a year old ; we may there- 
 fore confidently assume that this coat would not have been placed 
 in tliis window in compliment to the son as early as 13(52, for 
 he was then a boy of not more than iifteen years of age. To a 
 later date the lieraldry cannot with any probability be referred, 
 because in the year last mentioned the arms of Henry Earl of 
 liancaster, and also those of ^^'illiam Earl of Northampton, had 
 been discontinued ; for the former died in 13G1, without issue 
 male ; and the latter died in lo()0, and his son and heir became 
 in the year following the head of the family, by succeeding his 
 uncle in the earldom of Hereford ; when he no doubt ceased to 
 bear this differenced coat, which had been his father's. Add to 
 which, Thomas Lord Bradeston had died in 13G0, leaving an 
 infant grandson his heir. We must therefore go back to 1348, 
 or a trifle earlier, wdien Lawrence de Hastings, Earl of Pem- 
 broke, was living. Very little farther back can we go, because 
 the Black Prince w^as only ten years old in 1340, and was not 
 knighted till 134(3. It is therefore highly probable that this 
 glass, if it Avere not executed in 1347 or 1348, was designed or 
 ordered then, and executed within a year or two after. 
 
 It appears that we have in the window a group of the arms 
 of some of the heroes in the campaign of 1346-7, which is famous 
 for the victory at Cressy, and the successful siege of Calais. 
 The Black Prince, as is well known, commenced his glorious 
 career at Cressy. He led the first division, being assisted by the 
 Earls of Warwick and Oxford ; the second was under the com- 
 mand of the Earls of Arundel and Northampton ; and the third 
 was commanded by the King in person. Thomas Lord Berkeley, 
 his brother Sir ^Maurice de Berkeley, Pichard Ivord Talbot, and 
 Thomas Lord Bradeston, who were all in that expedition,' were 
 probably among the combatants as bannerets, though I find no 
 special mention of them on that occasion. The Earl of Lan- 
 caster was not at Cressy ; he had been sent to Guienne, and was 
 besieged in Aiguilhm by the IJuke of Normandy; for the relief 
 of wliich place was originally destined the army that landed in 
 
 friends. His arms were (/u. a saltier ' I'arne.s'.s History of Edward J] I., 
 
 ar;/. a, martlet si. Hull, t. VAw. HI., p. .'140 c7 scvy., and Dugdale's llarouago. 
 edited by Sir H. KieoUis. 
 
306 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 Normandy, and fought at Cressy, and very soon afterwards in- 
 vested Calais. With that Earl was Lawrence Earl of Pembroke, 
 who had already acquired a great military reputation for so 
 young a man. One effect of the victory at Cressy was the rais- 
 ing of the siege of Aiguillon ; and these two earls, after some 
 raids in the south of France, returned to England, and a few 
 months afterwards joined the King before Calais.^ 
 
 The siege of that town, which commenced in September, 1346, 
 continued till the 4th of August, 1347. It was there that, in 
 the latter year. Sir Maurice de Berkeley was killed. In the 
 following year the Earl of Pembroke died, being little more than 
 thirty years of age. The cause of his death I have not found 
 mentioned; possibly it was some malady induced by exertion 
 and exposure at the siege. It is not improbable that the three 
 missing coats (in addition to the royal arms) were those of the 
 Earls of Oxford, Hereford, and Huntingdon, who all held im- 
 portant commands in the campaign. Although Sir Maurice de 
 Berkeley and the Earl of Pembroke may have been dead before 
 this glass-painting was executed, it would have been quite 
 natural under the circumstances to include their coats in com- 
 memoration of them, whether we suppose the window to have 
 been presented by one of their fellow-soldiers, or put up by the 
 abbot and convent. 
 
 It will be observed that the barons whose arms are displayed 
 were not the most distinguished of those who were at Cressy or 
 Calais; but they and Sir Maurice de Berkeley were all more 
 or less connected with the county of Gloucester ; Lord Talbot 
 having, as it would seem, only one manor within it. The Earl 
 of Pembroke held numerous lordships in the adjoining marches 
 of Wales. 
 
 If I were to hazard a conjecture as to the person to whom we 
 are indebted for this noble window, I should say it was Lord 
 Bradeston. He was of the county, and was a vassal of the lord 
 of Berkeley, having held some knight's fees of that honour. A 
 
 ^ The urgent summons for these two in France). Edward was at that time 
 
 earls and others to go to the king's threatened with an attack by all the 
 
 assistance may be seen in Rymer (new force which the King of France could 
 
 ed,), iii. p. 120. No doubt they both bring against him. Both these earls, 
 
 obeyed. That the Earl of Lancaster before they went to Guieuue, had served 
 
 did is well known; and Dugdale, on the in Flanders with all the other noblemen 
 
 authority of the EotuU Francicc, states above mentioned whose arms were 
 
 that the Earl of Pembroke, "in 21 originally in the window, except perhaps 
 
 Edw. IIL, was again in those wars " {i.e. Richard Lord Talbot. 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL. 307 
 
 fortunate as well as a valiant soldier, though the beginning of his 
 career was rather ambiguous, he gained the favour of Edward III., 
 who in the fifth year of his reign confirmed to him for life the 
 Castle, Barton, and Tyne of Gloucester, which he had previously 
 obtained through the influence of Queen Isabella.^ This acqui- 
 sition must have made him of some importance in the town and 
 neighbourhood. According to Dugdale, he and Sir Maurice 
 de Berkeley were inseparable companions, and were created 
 bannerets at the same time. In 1342 he was summoned to Par- 
 liament. Now, on the supposition that he was the donor, the 
 arrangement of the arms is in accordance with the sentiments of 
 the age. The arms of the king, the prince, and the earls, have 
 tlie most honourable places ; except that the coat of Lord Berkeley, 
 w^liose barony was a very ancient one, and whose vassal Lord 
 Bradeston was, is i)laced amongst those of the earls; while the 
 coat of Lord Bradeston himself is in the least honourable place, 
 though as a baron he was of higher rank than Sir Maurice de 
 ]>erke]ey; but next before it is that of his deceased friend Sir 
 JMaurice. Had Lord Berkeley, or the abbot and convent, put 
 up the glass, I should have expected Lord Berkeley's coat to 
 have been where we find the Earl of IVmbroke's, and Lord 
 Bradeston's in tlie place of Sir Maurice de Berkeley's. 
 
 The conclusion, however, which the foregoing remarks warrant 
 as to the date of this glass, is not affected by any uncertainty in 
 regard to the person by whom it was presented or the cost of it 
 defrayed. Seeing how very closely the result of the evidence 
 afforded by the heraldry agrees with that derived from an exa- 
 mination of the style and execution of the various subjects and 
 details throughout, I think I am fully justified in stating that 
 the conception of this truly interesting glass-painting may be 
 attributed to 1347 or 1348, and that it was completed within a 
 year or two after that date, and most probably not later than 
 1350. This opinion has been formed with the more confidence 
 as the evidence afforded by this ancient monument has happily 
 not been destroyed or tampered with by any modern restorer. 
 
 ^ This grant was made to liim for his year before Lord Bradeston's death, and 
 
 life at a yearly rent payable to the he is said to have died seised of the 
 
 Exchequer. Some change, however, in castle, with a meadow called Castle- 
 
 the terms of his tenure seems to have mead, and the Tyne called Castle Coule. 
 
 taken place, for Dugdale mentions that See Dugd. Bcironage, ii. pp. 138, 139. 
 
 about 33 Edw. IIL he was appomted The Tyne was probably some newly- 
 
 governor of Gloucester Castle, with 60/. enclosed ground. 
 a year for that service. This was the 
 
 x2 
 
308 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 All critical investigators of ancient monuments, all lovers of 
 trutli and genuineness, are but too well aware of tlie terrible 
 significance wliicli the misapplied word "Restoration" has 
 acquired of recent years. The ravages of time, the obliteration 
 and confusion consequent on repeated repairs, or the much-abused 
 church warden^s " beautifi cation," are really trifling evils com- 
 pared with that careful and elaborate eradication of trustworthy 
 features, w^hich is always found to be the more absolute and 
 complete as we are assured that a " restoration" has been " skil- 
 ful," " costly," or *' thorough." It is seldom that an ordinary 
 workman evinces a love of unnecessary mischief, or that he pos- 
 sesses knowledge enough to enable him to do extensive injury : 
 but where the so-called "Restorer" comes, he rarely fails to 
 make an utter devastation, leaving the puzzled inquirer no 
 means of forming an opinion more satisfactory than one based 
 on the merest conjecture, as to what may have been the original 
 import or appearance of the work. 
 
 To the Archseological Institute may be ascribed the credit of 
 having rescued the interesting window above described from this 
 destructive process. The stonework had so far yielded to the 
 effects of time as to necessitate its being rebuilt, and the lead- 
 work of the glazing was so decayed as to render its complete 
 repair imperative. Application was not unnaturally made by 
 the Cathedral authorities to some leading firms of glass-painters 
 for advice as to the course to be pursued in respect of the painted 
 glass. Each recommended a "Restoration," varying only in 
 extent. One proposed merely a restoration of the missing parts 
 of the existing design; two others were for improving upon it, — 
 the one, by " working out the idea of a Heaven in the tracery ;" 
 the other, by " filling the entire window with rich glass." These 
 schemes were much considered during the meeting of the Insti- 
 tute held at Gloucester in 1800, And upon its appearing, from 
 a careful examination of the glazing in its then untouched state, 
 that a restoration of the missing parts of the existing design 
 would necessarily be for the most part conjectural, and that it 
 would at all events involve the introduction of so much new 
 glass as must of necessity have completely changed the general 
 aspect of the window, it was wdsely determined by the Dean and 
 Chapter, at the earnest recommendation of several members of 
 the Institute, to preserve the wreck that remained by a mere 
 releading of the glass, and to attempt nothing in the way of 
 restoration, beyond supplying such insignificant parts of the 
 
EAST WIXDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDRAL. 800 
 
 coloured grounds as were wanting with modern glass of corre- 
 sponding hue.^ So rigidly has this determination been adhered 
 to, that even the figure at the top of the window^ (Xo. 1), which 
 is evidently not in situ, has been reinstated : an expressive inti- 
 mation that things were left as they were found. 
 
 The archaeological inquirer has, therefore, precisely the same 
 means of investij^ation now as he would have had before the 
 recent repairs, if we except such guidance as the ancient lead- 
 work supplied, and which was useful chiefly for the assistance it 
 afforded in determining the authenticity of the glazing of the 
 tracery lights ; and the artist may study the remains of the ori- 
 ginal glass and observe its fine tone and texture as heretofore. 
 Having had occasion to compare these notes, written for tlie 
 most part before the glazing was moved, with the window since 
 its repair, I could detect no other difference in its appearance 
 than what would naturally result from the glass having been 
 unavoidably freed from a good deal of the whitewash and mortar 
 which in course of years had encumbered its surface. 
 
 Apart from the historical associations which attach to every 
 ancient work, and pre-eminently to the present, it may be 
 doubted whether the Gloucester window does not owe most of 
 its popularity to the fine tone and rich hue of its glass. It 
 would be impossible to meet with white glass that is more solid 
 and silvery in effect ; the red is beautifully varied, and is most 
 luminous even in its deepest parts ;^ and the tone of the blue can 
 hardly be surpassed. It must also be admitted that the general 
 design, through the size and simplicity of its parts, is calculated 
 to produce a good and distinct effect at a distance, and that the 
 execution of the painting, rough and imperfect though it be, is, 
 on account of its crispness and boldness, well adapted to the 
 
 ' The folloNs-ing statistics may not glass-painters for the proposed restora- 
 
 be unintei'esting. The glazing of the tions alluded to in the text were as 
 
 window, when taken down, amounted to follows: for the first, 1141/. 4.?. C^d. ; for 
 
 about 2000 square feet; and weighed, the second, 1700/.; fur the third, 1170/. 
 
 including the leadwork, aboiit 35 cwt. Their moderation is not questioned. 
 
 It was entirely releaded for 600/. by ^ Any modern red glass which should 
 
 Mr. Hughes, of Frith Sti-eet, Soho, equal in hue the deeper portions of the 
 
 whose reparations of the north rose original red glass used in this window 
 
 window of Lincoln Cathedral, and of a would be nearly opaque ; whereas all 
 
 window at North Moreton church, the old is clear and transparent : the 
 
 Berks, have been noticed in the Archaeo- reason for the diflference being that the 
 
 logical Journal, vol. xiv. p. 211, and laminpe of colouring matter are at a 
 
 vol. xviii. p. 153, and p. 222 of the pre- greater distance apart in the old streaked 
 
 sent volume. The estimates of the other ruby than in the modern smooth ruby. 
 
310 PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 nature of glass, so potent of its kind. But here our admiration 
 should stop. Like all other mediaeval works in painted glass, 
 the present is open to the gravest criticism. The figures are 
 ill-drawn, ungraceful, and insipid. The shading, though sufficient 
 both in depth and quantity, if handled with skill, to have pro- 
 duced a due effect of relief — an effect which obviously had been 
 aimed at — is so inartificially emj^loyed as to be useful only so 
 far as it serves to impart tone and richness to the composition, 
 and by contrast to increase its brilliancy. Every part of the 
 figure, and all the members of the shrinework, seem to be equally 
 in the same plane; though the real depth of the design, as 
 shown by the lines of the drawing, and the very nature of the 
 composition, is considerable.^ Whatever general distinctness of 
 effect it possesses is due to the completeness with which the 
 simple forms of the white figures and canopies are cut out and 
 insulated by the coloured grounds, an achievement of no great 
 difficulty. 
 
 I make these remarks not in a spirit of disparagement — the 
 work was a great one in the uncritical times in which it was 
 executed — but in the hope, if possible, of arousing attention to 
 the lowness of the standard to which we, who deem ourselves so 
 enlightened in the nineteenth century, are labouring to conform 
 
 ^ All antiquaries know that the This hardly requires any serious refu- 
 " ironed- out-flat " style was never pecu- tation. According to our critic, the 
 liar to pictures on glass, but equally representation of a man rendered visible 
 characterises the wall and easel pictures by the agency of transmitted light is 
 of a time when art was in its imma- '* a transpax-ent man; " not a transparent 
 turity. If we condemn the feature in representation of a man, as ordinary 
 the one case, we cannot consistently persons might be disposed to consider 
 regard it with favour in the other. I it. His objection, if sound, would ex- 
 was concerned to read in so sensible a elude from representation in painted 
 print as the Athenceum (20 Dec. 1862), glass all objects but those which are by 
 certain critical dicta on glass-painting, nature pellucid. Imperfection, however 
 which, with a pretended air of philo- ludicrous, in the imitation of an opaque 
 sophy, reduce the ai"t to mere coloured object, would fail to render it admissible, 
 glazing. The writer supports an objec- For a representation of a man, treated 
 tion to the use of a well-known picture decoi'atively, and so far conventionalised 
 by a German artist as a design for a as in no way to imitate the aspect of 
 glass-painting, by asking, " Can any- life — such as the knave of spades — if 
 thing be more absurd than the idea of a transferred to a painted window, would 
 transparent man ? " and he goes on to still be " a transparent man," as much 
 say, that in a glass-painting all the as, and no more than, the most lifelike 
 " details mvist be treated decoratively, and pictorial representation of such an 
 not pictorially, and so far conventional- object in painted glass could be. Are 
 ised that in no way do they imitate, as we to give up, for the theories of such a 
 a picture rightly does^ the aspect of life, critic as this, the practice of the best ages 
 otherwise we come to transparent men." and greatest artists in glass-painting ? 
 
EAST WINDOW OF GLOUCESTER CATHEDEAL. 
 
 311 
 
 ill our Church decorations:^ a circumstance wliich would be 
 utterly inexplicable did not experience show that a fashion, in 
 every age, has never been the less omnipotent on account of its 
 absurdity, or even ugliness. 
 
 ' Nothing could be worse, <as a whole, 
 than tlie English specimens of glass- 
 painting at the International Exhibition 
 of 1862 ; or indeed more discouraging, 
 considering the immense sums expended 
 of late on this species of decoration. 
 The Royal Commissioners would seem 
 
 to have prefei-red to render their awards 
 absolutely valueless by distributing 
 prizes to the bad and indifferent alike, 
 rather than to waste time on a critical 
 investigation, which probably could not 
 have been attended with any very bene- 
 ficial result. 
 
 From Adderbury Church, Oxon. 
 
XV. 
 
 REMARKS ON THE PAINTED GLASS AT LICHFIELD 
 CATHEDRAL.^ 
 
 (From the ' Arcli?eological Journal/ vol. xxi., 184G.) 
 
 HE beautiful glass-paintings which occupy (amongst 
 others) the seven eastern windows of the choir of 
 Lichfield Cathedral belonged originally to the 
 Abbey of Hercl^enrode, in the old episcopal princi- 
 pality of Liege. They are of the Italian-Flemish 
 school, and appear from dates upon them to have 
 been executed between 1532 and 1539. After 
 the destruction of the abbey, the glass passed into 
 the possession of Sir Brooke Boothby, Bart., who transferred it 
 to the Dean and Chapter of Lichfield, by whom it was placed 
 where it now is, in or about the year 1803 (A).^ 
 
 At the present time, when the very refuse of the Continent is 
 sought for, and even forgeries of ancient painted glass occasionally 
 command high prices, such an acquisition would have produced 
 no slight sensation, and a knowledge of the surpassing merit of 
 these windows would have been generally diffused by means 
 of the press. As it is, there is perhaps no work of equal import- 
 ance in this country so little known or appreciated. 
 
 To the antiquary this glass may appear less interesting than 
 that in the Beauchamp Chapel at Warwick, to which so many 
 historical and local associations attach ; but it must always be 
 an object of the deepest interest to the student of glass-painting, 
 anxious to trace the progress of the art, and to ascertain the 
 method by which such striking and beautiful pictorial effects 
 have been produced. 
 
 To those who have recently examined the painted glass in the 
 Beauchamp Chapel ^ it may seem somewhat surprising that both 
 
 1 Read on the occasion of the visit of ^ The painted glass in the Beauchamp 
 the Archseological Institute to Lichfield, Chapel was a special subject of interest 
 July 29, during the Annual Meeting at the Meeting at Warwick ; a Discourse 
 held at Warwick, 18 64-. on it, communicated by the autlior of 
 
 2 This and other letters between this Memoir, forms the subject of that 
 brackets refer to notes at the end. which follows. 
 
PLATE 'mi. 
 
 LICHFILLD CATHEDRAL 
 
 CKarLes^»'?instcr- ie. 
 
 I'Mlip DelaTTiC 
 
 Viri.:eni 3rooK5 
 
PAINTED GLASS AT LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 313 
 
 examples should have been produced by precisely the same 
 technical process (B) ; and that the difference in effect between 
 them, which we cannot fail to observe, should be entirely due to 
 the greater skill of the artists who executed the works now 
 under consideration. 
 
 We are familiar with the expression "the new method," by 
 which Vasari and other writers on art designated the practice 
 of the great painters of the Eenaissance. The influence of this 
 practice is shown as clearly in the Lichfield windows, as is that 
 of the hard, dry, flat style of the pictorial art of their day in 
 the windows of the Beauchamp Chapel. xVnd surely, if the 
 "new method" of the Renaissance (the invention, be it re- 
 membered, of the greatest artistic geniuses whose works have 
 come down to us) is admirable, and is admired in all other kinds 
 of painting, we may well ask why should its adoption in glass- 
 painting alone be deemed wrong? In what does the impro- 
 priety consist ? Is any essential or fundamental rule of glass- 
 painting thereby violated ? I feel that a glance at the windows 
 at Lichfield ought to set these questions at rest. But, as the 
 works of the Renaissance in painted glass have been of late years 
 systematically decried by a certain class of writers, not merely on 
 account of their style, as being in the Italian and not the Gothic 
 manner (a question with which wo need not concern ourselves), 
 but upon the broader ground that their design and mode of 
 execution (matters perfectly distinct from style) are essentially 
 erroneous, I trust that I shall not be deemed tedious if I 
 endeavour briefly to show that in works like those at Lichfield 
 there really is no violation of the conditions imposed by the 
 nature of glass, considered as a material affording a means of 
 art. i am not aware, indeed, of the existence of any conditions 
 that can be supposed to prohibit an artist from producing as 
 perfect a pictorial effect in a glass-painting as he is able, pro- 
 vided he does not unnecessarily or excessively reduce the trans- 
 parency and brilliancy of the glass. 
 
 The principal objections urged are, I believe, that the artists 
 of the Renaissance ought not to have attempted pictures in 
 painted glass, or anything higher than mere coloured mosaics, 
 because the nature of glass is such that more complete and 
 perfect pictures can be produced by other methods of painting ; 
 that their works are overshaded, and therefore unsuited to the 
 nature of a translucent material ; and that the attempt to form 
 a picture in glass is always accompanied by a diminution, in a 
 certain degree, of the depth of cokmring. 
 
314 REMAllKS ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 The first objection can easily be disposed of, upon the ground 
 that it tends unnecessarily to h'mit the resources of art. Ex- 
 perience shows that we take delight in various methods of repre- 
 sentation, some of which are certainly not less imperfect tlian 
 glass-painting ; and that an artist's power in meeting and over- 
 coming technical difficulties always forms a large ingredient in 
 our estimate of his abilities. 
 
 To the second it may be answered, that, though it is true that 
 translucency is the essential characteristic of a painting upon 
 glass, and that any practice tending unnecessarily to reduce it 
 must be vicious, yet, as it is impossible to give force and ex- 
 pression to a glass-painting without some diminution of its 
 transparency, the extent to which obscuration may properly be 
 carried becomes a question of degree. Thus we rightly condemn 
 the use of enamel colouring, that is to say, the method of 
 colouring glass with enamels, instead of (as in the windows at 
 Lichfield) using for the coloured parts of the picture glass 
 coloured in its manufacture, and not afterwards, and which is as 
 transparent as white glass itself. For though more varied and 
 even truer effects of colour are obtainable by means of enamels, 
 such gain is disproportioned to the loss of effect through the dul- 
 ness and want of brilliancy occasioned by the use of enamel 
 colouring. But the employment of an opaque enamel colour 
 for the purpose of producing the chiaroscuro of a picture in 
 glass is legitimate, if confined within reasonable limits. 
 
 The third objection must necessarily fall to the ground upon 
 its appearing that pictorial compositions of a higher nature than 
 mere mosaics are allowable in painted glass, as being unopposed 
 to any rule of glass-painting ; for, without using colours varying 
 in degrees of depth, it would be impossible to impart requisite 
 distinctness and relief. 
 
 In determining the various questions involved, we naturally 
 turn to ancient examples as affording the best means of com- 
 parison and selection. But, before submitting ourselves to the 
 teaching of antiquity, we should do well to bear in mind that 
 mediaeval architecture and mediaeval painted glass stand upon 
 a very different footing. The one had reached a point high 
 enough to place it in the first rank of the architectural styles of 
 the world, at a time when the art of representation on a plane 
 surface (including glass-painting) was comparatively in its 
 infancy. The latter, as is well known, did not attain perfection 
 in the north of Europe until the period to which these very 
 glass-paintings belong, and not initil after the decline of Gothic 
 
AT LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 315 
 
 architecture. The accidental association therefore of the earlier 
 styles of glass-painting with Gothic buildings is far from proving 
 that any necessary or scientific connection exists between the 
 best Gothic architecture and the state of the art of representa- 
 tion as then practised in glass-painting. Nor ought we to be 
 deterred by any such association from condemning, along with 
 their bad drawing, the confusion and want of relief which in a 
 greater or less degree characterise all the painted windows 
 executed previously to the second quarter of the sixteenth cen- 
 tury. It is observable, however, that the most keen opponents 
 of cinquecento art justify, on the score of taste, their preference 
 of what may be familiarly designated the " ironed-out-fiat 
 style" in painted glass — a style in wliich complicated compositions 
 intended to represent objects occupying various distances from 
 the eye are so inartificially dra\vn, shaded, and coloured, as to 
 look as if they had all been compressed flat into one plane, as is 
 exemplified in old windows. (C.) 
 
 It may be admitted that a composition of a flatter nature 
 than is absolutely demanded by the conditions of glass-painting 
 might occasionally be employed with advantage, if it was treated 
 artistically, and did not exhibit (like the iroued-out-flat style) 
 the flatness which results merely from feebleness and imperfect 
 knowledge. And such a glass-painting, in proportion to its 
 simplicity and approach to a mere mosaic, might display a more 
 uniform degTee of brilliancy, and a more uniform expanse of the 
 deepest colouring, than would be possible in one of a more com- 
 plex and pictorial character. But it would be found veiy difficult 
 to design such a composition upon a very large scale ; nor would 
 its style be suitable for general adoption, since it would neces- 
 sarily confine the subjects of glass-painting to a very few, and 
 those of the simplest nature. Practically, therefore, our choice 
 would be in favour of glass-paintings more nearly approaching 
 the character of pictures (of which class those at Lichfield, and 
 other contemporary works, might be considered to be the type) 
 on its appearing that they exhibited the highest pictorial effect 
 of which glass-painting can be rendered capable, without vio- 
 lating that condition of the art which forbids undue obscuration 
 of the material. That they do not infringe this rule is actually 
 proved by those most opposed to the style in question, who 
 occasionally place in invidious comparison with " the overloaded 
 (with enamel) and overshaded cinquecento," mediaeval works in 
 which shadow not unfrequently occurs equal in quantity, and 
 even more opaque than what was used in the cinquecento style. 
 
316 EEMAEKS ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 It is a fact that the fourteenth- century figures and canopies in 
 the east window of Gloucester Cathedral are more profusely and 
 densely shaded than the pictures at Lichfield, and other examples 
 might be adduced. Doubtless the effect of relief thus produced 
 in these early works is very inferior to that in the Lichfield 
 glass-paintings ; but this, after all proper allowance has been 
 made for the difference of material, is found to be due only to 
 the greater skill and knowledge with which the shading in the 
 later works is executed : the aggregate amount of obscuration is 
 about the same in both instances. Nor, indeed, do the Renais- 
 sance glass-paintings of this particular period, although so pic- 
 torial, and exhibiting such masses of shadow, at all suffer by 
 comparison with the most brilliant mediaeval examples. On the 
 other hand, the comparative dulness of glass-paintings of a later 
 date, though scarcely attended by any corresponding advantage, 
 proves that the obscuration of the material had reached its 
 proper limit in such works as those now under consideration. 
 That these glass-paintings also exhibit the greatest pictorial 
 effect of which glass is legitimately susceptible, is manifest on 
 comparing them both with earlier and later examples. 
 
 The radical error of the earlier works of the Eenaissance is 
 the complicated nature of their composition; that of the later 
 is the complicated nature of their chiaroscuro ; for to deal with 
 either composition or chiaroscuro successfully would require 
 resources not possessed by the glass-painter. His difficulties 
 spring from the fewness of the glass colours, their uniform 
 brightness, the impossibility of providing hues and tones to 
 modify or unite them, and the imperfect means of imitating 
 light and shade. 
 
 The evil attending the use of too complicated compositions is 
 shown in the windows of King's College Chapel, Cambridge, 
 and the east window of St. Margaret's church, Westminster (D). 
 These are mostly overcrowded with groups of figures extending 
 backwards into the extreme distance, which is elevated to an 
 absurd height in order to display them. The background 
 occupies too large a proportion of the picture to admit of its 
 being executed in the few retiring tints which glass supplies, 
 without injury to the general colouring ; other colours are there- 
 fore necessarily introduced, which come as forward as those in 
 the foreground (E). The effect is flat and confused, however 
 skilfully the light and shade may be managed. To a certain 
 extent the same fault is observable in such of the glass-paintings 
 at Lichfield as exhibit groups of figures in the distance, aud 
 
AT LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 317 
 
 especially where the colours used are primary, or strongly 
 contrasted. 
 
 AYe become only the more sensible of the disagreeable effect 
 occasioned by the attempt to produce complicated chiaroscuro in 
 painted glass, by contemplating the very works in which the 
 experiment has been carried out with the most success, viz., 
 those large pictures on glass, common towards the close of the 
 last and at the commencement of the present century, which 
 were faithfully copied from oil-paintings especially remarkable 
 for the breadth and variety of their light and shade. The glass, 
 like the canvas, is shaded all over gradually from a point of 
 light ; but it is immediately perceived that an extensive mass 
 of shadow in glass fails as an imitation of shade. It looks flat, 
 dr}^ and even flimsy, and suggests rather the idea of a dirty 
 window that has been sprinkled with drops of rain, than of clear 
 immaterial gloom, such as is so well expressed by the shadow in 
 an oil-painting (F). To the same cause, the attempting too 
 much in the way of chiaroscuro, may be traced the dulness of 
 almost all the glass-paintings that were executed after the middle 
 of the sixteenth century. 
 
 Subject to these introductory observations, I would invite 
 attention to the manner in which the difficulties of the art have 
 been met or evaded, and its resources developed, in the glass at 
 Lichfield. AVhether it was dictated by a profound knowledge 
 of the material or by timidity, by the influence of traditional 
 rules or by some happy chance, we must admit that the end 
 proposed was admirably adapted to the means. 
 
 The picture is extremely simple in its composition, consisting 
 of a foreground group, a landscape background of a sketchy 
 character, and a clear blue sky. As a iTde, it is represented as 
 if seen through an architectural framewoi'k or canopy, which is 
 more or less connected with the group by means of piers or 
 columns introduced in the background. The whole is har- 
 moniously coloured upon a principle of relief and general re- 
 semblance to nature. The more positive colours, and those 
 possessing the greatest degrees of depth, are confined to the 
 foregTound,' being used in the group and in the ornaments of 
 the architectural framework. The more qualified — the lighter 
 shades and retiring tints — are employed in the backgTound and 
 sky. The architectural framework or canopy is composed prin- 
 cipally of white glass shaded with brown, and enriched with 
 yellow stain. It is adorned with garlands and other ornaments 
 in which, as being the objects nearest the eye, the colours are 
 
318 REMARKS ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 with propriety harmoniously contrasted. In the gronp har- 
 monious gradations of colour occur, though, on account of the 
 nature of the material, the harmony of contrast prevails. Its 
 colouring is moreover so arranged that the eye is insensibly led 
 up to some striking point or spot, produced by the decided intro- 
 duction of one of the primary colours, or by a strong contrast, 
 which gives light and spirit to the composition. In the distance 
 and sky the harmony is that of gradation or resemblance. In 
 general the most successful pictures are those iu which the 
 landscapes are wholly formed of different tints of grey, modified 
 with brown shading and the yellow stain, for in these windows 
 the space occupied by the landscape and sky is intentionally 
 so confined by the architectural framework, or by some other 
 means, as to prevent its colour presenting too extensive a mass. 
 The horizon is sometimes lighter, sometimes darker, but always 
 more solid in appearance than the sky, which is left clear and 
 transparent ; whilst the brilliancy of the landscape is necessarily 
 more or less subdued by the enamel brown used in the drawing 
 and shading. The architectural distances are generally rendered 
 with much fidelity and consistency. They are worked out chiefly 
 on white glass with drawing and shading, and the occasional 
 addition of the yellow stain. To a certain extent the colours 
 are united and brought together by tlie enamel bi'own with 
 which the chiaroscuro of the picture is represented, but the 
 harmony of the colouring depends principally on the skill shown 
 in arranging the pieces of coloured glass. It is true that all tlie 
 colours used are very modified in their tone, more so indeed 
 than those of any other period, but this has only rendered their 
 harmonious disposition so much the less difficult. 
 
 In the subject of Christ before Pilate the harmony of colouring 
 is effected principally by contrast. In the picture above, Christ 
 bearing the Cross, it is produced chiefly by gradation of resem- 
 blance. In the subject of the Day of Pentecost a curious 
 example is afforded of gradation of colour worked out very 
 completely. One of the most beautiful, as well as most pictu- 
 resque, of the architectural backgrounds is that in the Lord's 
 Supper, in the east window. 
 
 The force and expression of the picture are of course chiefly 
 given by its chiaroscuro. And, bearing in mind what has been 
 said of the ill effect of very extensive masses of shade in painted 
 glass, it is remarkable that here, as in the works generally of 
 this period, the shadows are always confined within comj)ara- 
 tively narrow liniitSo The chiaroscuro, though very i)Owerful, is 
 
AT LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 319 
 
 extremely simple. The requisite relief is imparted by means 
 rather of strong but harmonious contrasts, than by gradations 
 of lisrht and shade. 
 
 The subjects are treated as if they were seen in the open air, 
 whatever their situation may be. A point of light is barely if 
 at all distinguishable. It is seldom that a figure, even in the 
 rear of a group, is entirely in shade. The light is usually made 
 to fall on all the figures alike, and the dark or shaded side of 
 one figure is contrasted and relieved against the light side of the 
 next. For the more extensive shadows necessary to give breadth 
 and relief to the composition, recourse is had to the soffits or 
 roofs of the architectural framework, under or behind which the 
 group is placed, and which are deeply shaded. A pillar, or other 
 architectural accessory, is not unfrequently represented in shadow 
 behind the group. The shaded soffit is contrasted with the clear 
 sky and with the full light on the front of the architectural 
 framework or canopy ; the shaded pillar or other accessory is 
 contrasted with the landscape background, which is represented 
 in full light, or with the sky. Instances of these various modes 
 of producing relief by means of shadows of limited extent may 
 be met with in nearly all these glass-paintings. The artifice is 
 most shown in the subject of the Annunciation on the north side 
 of the choir ; the principal mass of shadow here is on the roof of 
 the apartment within which the scene occurs, and it is remarkable 
 how small is the extent of its deepest part: the effectiveness 
 may be readily estimated by covering this portion of the picture 
 with a book or the hand. It is most concealed in the subjects 
 of Christ before Pilate, and the Incredulity of St. Thomas. In 
 the former, which is the most effective of all the pictures, there 
 is an unusually large quantity of shade in the sunken arched 
 panel which surmounts the lintel of the opening through which 
 the group is viewed ; but it is so artfully disguised by means of 
 the full lights introduced on the arabesques spread over the panel, 
 and by their golden colour, as not to catch the eye. In the 
 latter subject there is not only the dark pillar in the background, 
 but an accidental shadow is cast upon the tribune beliind the 
 group, the scroll-work on the top of which comes darkly across 
 and gives value to the bright landscape in the distance. 
 
 The result of these various experiments and contrivances has 
 been the production of a series of pictures in painted glass, 
 harmonious in their colouring, simple and intelligible in their 
 composition, distinct and powerful in effect, yet always brilliant 
 and translucent. They also display a very advanced state of art 
 
320 REMAKES ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 in the grouping and figure-drawing, and, as works intended to be 
 seen from a moderate distance, they are of unsurpassed merit. 
 It is probable that, if the three apsidal windows had been painted 
 for the situation they now occupy, and of which so distant a view 
 is obtainable, they would have been designed in a simpler and 
 severer manner, more approaching the style of those most 
 powerful and striking of glass-paintings, the windows in the 
 chapel of the Miraculous Sacrament and in the transepts at 
 Brussels Cathedral (G). 
 
 I am aware that in this necessarily brief and imperfect state- 
 ment I may have failed to do justice to the subject. My object 
 is to induce that actual study of these windows at Lichfield 
 which will supply all my deficiencies. Whilst examining them 
 we must constantly bear in mind that, although they have 
 hitherto fortunately escaped "restoration," they have suffered 
 materially from three centuries of exposure to the weather. 
 The whole outer surface of the glass has become corroded, by 
 which not merely the high liglits, but the unpainted parts, have 
 been toned down and subdued, and thereby not only a flatter 
 appearance has been imparted to the windows than they must 
 have possessed when recently executed, but even much of the 
 effect intended by the contrast of the clear brilliancy of the sky 
 with the comparative obscurity .of the painted figures, architec- 
 ture, and landscape, has been lost. 
 
 Great however as these works are, they are objects of study, 
 not of servile imitation. If ever the time come when the practice 
 of glass-painting shall be taken up in England at the point 
 where the Kenaissance left it, even the best existing glass- 
 paintings will be found susceptible of improvement. No advance 
 has been made beyond such productions as the Lichfield windows, 
 except in some recently executed by the modern Munich school. 
 That school, after nearly half a century spent in the consistent 
 treatment of glass-painting as a branch of fine art, has lately 
 abandoned the vicious practice of colouring glass with enamels, 
 for the purer, though infinitely more difficult, method of the 
 Eenaissance, at the instance of those true patrons of the art who 
 conceived and have carried out the greatest modern work of its 
 kind, the adornment of Glasgow Cathedral with painted glass. 
 The chief improvement displayed at Glasgow is the employment 
 of many new and additional tints of coloured glass, which have 
 enabled the artists more easily to blend them, and to avoid 
 repeating in the backgrounds the colours used in the foregrounds. 
 The evil of this is seen in the tendency of some of the white 
 
AT LICHFIELD CA'JIIEDILVL. 321 
 
 objects in the Lichfield foregrounds to unite with the arcliitec- 
 tural ^stances. The avoidance of distant groups and of any 
 strong contrasts of colour in the backgrounds is also an improve- 
 ment; and so is the occasional enlivening of tlie horizons by 
 the introduction of rosy tints, kept in their place by means of a 
 blue enamel legitimately applied in the same way as the ordinary 
 shading. Some of the figures are indeed noble works of art, but 
 art has always characterised the Munich school. In colouring 
 and power the Glasgow^ windoAvs are inferior to those at Lichfield. 
 Their material, like all ordinary modern glass, is comparatively 
 flimsy, and its colours are crude ; the general treatment also is 
 rather of the kind suitable to fresco, which requires light colours 
 and light shadows for effect at a distance, tlian that proper to a 
 glass-painting, which, being by nature translucent, demands deep 
 shadow^s and much powerful colouring to prevent its appearing 
 weak. We must expect, however, that the IMunich artists will 
 rival the old glass in both particulars long before our glass- 
 painters can approach it in either, unless we renounce our 
 practice of encouraging the production of works that will bear 
 no comparison with the high standard w^e usually propose to 
 ourselves in secular art (H). Archaeology is not art, nor will a 
 gi'eat artist ever condescend to become an archaeological pedant. 
 If we could transfer him from the influence of the art of the 
 modern world to the exclusive study of some phase of mediaeval 
 art, we should only cramp his energies, and at best create a 
 learned mannerist resembling a professor of religious painting in 
 Kussia. 
 
 Supplementary Notes. 
 
 A. — The Abbey of Herckenrode (equivalent to Herckenrood) seems to have 
 been situate near the village of Hercken, in the ancient county of Loos, which 
 in the seventeenth century became annexed to Liege. See ' Chronologic His- 
 torique des Comtes de Loos,' T/Art de Verifier les Dates, torn. iv. 254. Lie'ge 
 was annexed to France by the treaty of Luneville in 1801, after which the 
 abbey was probably dissolved. At the general peace the district became part 
 of the kingdom of the Netherlands, and since the revolution in 1830 it has 
 formed part of Belgium. 
 
 The circumstances which made Lichfield Cathedral the depository of these 
 fine glass-paintings are recorded in the following inscription in the east window 
 of the south aisle of the choir : — 
 
 " Qua3 in apside vicina insunt, septem fenestrte picturata?, coonobio canoni- 
 corum Herckenrodensi quod olim exornaverant foedissime direpto atque diruto, 
 novam, et, deo volente, stabiliorem sedem hac ecclesia nactaj sunt; ope et 
 consilio viri in omni judicio elegantissimi, Dom. Brooke Boothby, de Ashburn 
 aula in comitatu Derb. Baronetti : anno sacro MDCCCIIL" 
 
 Y 
 
322 REMARKS ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 The following principal subjects are represented : — 
 
 The Resurrection, and, in the distance, Christ appearing to Peter (dated 
 1538); Christ before Pilate (dated 1539) ; the Descent from the Cross, and, in 
 the distance, the three Marys anointing the Body; Christ bearing the Cross ; 
 the Incredulity of St. Thomas; the Day of Pentecost (daled 1534) ; the Day 
 of Judgment; the Betrayal; the Triumphal Entry (dated 1538); the Last 
 Supper, and, in the distance, Christ washing the Disciples' feet; the Lord's 
 Supper, and, in the distance, three small figures (dated 1537); the Ascension; 
 the Annunciation, and, in the distance, the meeting of Mary and Elizabeth 
 (dated 1539) ; Christ crowned with Thorns, and, in the distance, Christ buf- 
 feted by the Soldiers ; and the Flagellation. 
 
 The first four are in a window on the south side of the choir ; the three 
 following are in the next window; the next three in the southern apsidal 
 window ; the next two in the east window ; and the next three in the northern 
 apsidal window. 
 
 There are, besides, in the next window to the last, six smaller subjects repre- 
 senting benefactors to the abbey (parts of larger subjects) ; and in the next 
 four other subjects similar to the last, but of larger size. The portrait in this 
 window of the Cardinal de la Marck, Prince Bishop of Liege 3505-1538, much 
 as it has suffered from time, shows to what extent direct imitation may be 
 carried in glass-painting. The tracery lights of all these windows are filled 
 with fragmeiits of painted glass of tiie same period as the subjects, disposed 
 in a kind of mosaic pattern. Much ingenuity has been exerted in fitting 
 the glass-paintings to the widths of the present windows, and the mullions to the 
 divisions of the glass. Each composition was originally designed to till a space 
 divided as now, bj'- mullions, into three parts, for the areas occupied by the 
 stone-work are excluded from the designs, over which the mullions seem to 
 pass, in the same manner as the horizontal saddle-bars. It may shock a modern 
 architectural purist to find the mullions treated, according to their primary use, 
 as mere uprights to support horizontal iron bars ; but as they interfere with 
 the glass composition scarcely more than upright iron bars would, the practice 
 (which by the way dates from very early times) may be justified as a means of 
 combining grandeur and breadth of effect in the glass-painting with the con- 
 struction of a Gothic building. 
 
 B. — This process is technically called the " mosaic method," in order to 
 distinguish it from two other methods of painting glass, the " enamel " and the 
 " mosaic enamel." A full description of each is given in ' An Inquiry into 
 the Difference of Style observable in Ancient Glass-Paintings, especially in 
 England; with Hints on Glass-Painting. By an Amateur. Parker, 1848.' 
 
 [A description of these methods, given in the note, is here omitted, as 
 they have already been described in the present volume. In the course of 
 the note the author, after observing that there are satisfactory reasons for con- 
 sidering the mosaic method to be the true method of glass-painting, adds, " I am 
 not aware of any modern improvement upon it except the occasional use, by 
 the Munich glass-painters, of an enamel of a different colour from brown for 
 shading purposes."] 
 
 C. — No one holds the earlier glass in greater respect than myself : without 
 it we should not have had the cinquecento, which is the development of the 
 older experience. But nothing can be less scientific or more ridiculous than 
 the indiscriminate reproduction in modern works of the imperfections of 
 the old. 
 
 D. — The contracts for the King's College Chapel windows, published in 
 
AT LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 323 
 
 Walpole's * Anecdotes of Painting,' are dated 1526. It is my belief that the 
 date of the window at St. Margaret's, Westminster, is about 1526. Mr. Scharf, 
 in his excellent notes on the windows of King's College Chapel (see this 
 Journal, vol. xii. p. 356, also vol. xiii. p. 45), which abound in valuable 
 notices of Flemish glass-painters, attributes the Lichfield windows, on the 
 authority of IVIrs. Jameson, to Lambert Lombard of Liege, the master of Franz 
 Floris, commonly called the Flemish Raphael. 
 
 E. — An instance of this, which occurs in the east window of King's College 
 Chapel, is thus noticed by Mr. Scharf, in this Journal, vol. xiii. p. 55 : — " One 
 singular expedient (of preserving the balance of colour) is worth mentioning. 
 In the lower right-hand subject a mass of red was required against the extensive 
 blue and green of the landscape. To afford this, a large patch of the landscape 
 itself was coloured bright red. At a distance it looks like a banner floating ; 
 but on closer inspection rocks and grass on it are distinctly visible." 
 
 F. — This results from the ver}' nature of a transparent picture. The shadow 
 painted upon glass is only a partial stopping out of the light, the rays of which 
 are equally bright, however much diminished they may be in size by the small- 
 ness of the interstices in the coat of enamel through which they find their way. 
 A similar appearance may be noticed in line-engravings, though not so easil}', 
 partly owing to their small size as compared with a glass-painting, but prin- 
 cipally because the rays of light are there modified by being reflected from an 
 opaque surface, instead of coming directly to the eye from the source of light, 
 as in a glass-painting. In an oil-j^ainting ihe rays, besides being reflected, 
 usually i)ass through some medium which is riot perfectly transparent. 
 
 G. — The dates of these w^indows, as appearing on the glass, and as given by 
 Levy (' Histoire de la Peinture sur Verre,' Bruxellcs, 1860), vary from 1537 to 
 1547. The second window from the east, in the chapel, is proved by this 
 author to have been designed (and he adds, executed) by Bernard van Orley, 
 whom he conjectures, and with reason, to have designed the two transept win- 
 dows. The fourth window from the east, in the chapel, appears, from the same 
 authority, to have been designed by Michael van Coxie, and executed by Jean 
 Haecht of Antwerp. Van Coxie is also stated to have designed another, and 
 Haecht (or, as it is sometimes spelt, Ack) to have executed two others of the 
 chapel windows. 
 
 These works are remarkable for a sim])licity of design, with a vigour and 
 breadth of treatment, worthy of authors who were disciples of Raphael. In- 
 tended for distant effect, they are, perhaps, less delicate and refined than the 
 Lichfield windows, though entirely free from any imfjutation of coarseness. 
 The groups are less crowded, and the figures, instead of being much under life- 
 size, exceed it by several inches. The pictures resemble those at Lichfield in 
 the use made of architectural accessories as an additional means of simple but 
 powerful effects of light and shade, and also in the principle of their colouring, 
 which is in entire harmony with the chiaroscuro of the composition, instead of 
 being uncomformable \\ ith, or even opposed to it, as in earlier examples. The 
 architectural frame which supports the groups and regulates the extent of 
 the background is simple and grand in design. In the transept windows it is 
 in the form of a pavilion, having an arched roof on piers, within which is the 
 group consisting of the kneeling figures of the donors su]:»ported by their patron 
 saints. In the chapel windows similar pavilions are used alternately with 
 loggias, or double colonnades. All these are of two stories ; the upper is 
 occupied with the figures representing an incident of the legend, the lower with 
 
 Y 2 
 
324 REMAKES ON THE PAINTED GLASS 
 
 the effigies of the donors and their patron saints. The perspective is modified 
 so as to avoid the occurrence of uupleasing angles in the upper parts of the 
 composition ; and for the sake of picturesqueness the chief point of sight is a 
 little removed from the middle to the side of the window. The figures are in 
 strong but simple light and shade ; the soffits of the arches and roofs, and the 
 further row of piers and columns, are in deep shade. A landscape is properly- 
 dispensed with, since its ajjpearance would he inconsistent with such an ele- 
 vated position above the eye as is by the perspective shown to be occupied by 
 the group, and the architecture and figures are represented as if they were 
 seen in relief against a clear blue sky. The extensive mass of white which 
 the architecture presents (tinted, however, with the shading and drawing upon 
 it and enriched with the yellow stain) imparts, as at Lichfield, great value to 
 the other colours. Garlands and other ornaments are used, the colours of 
 which, when occurring in large quantities, are (qualified and harmoniously 
 graduated ; positive colours and strong contrasts being usually confined to the 
 smaller accessories. The group is coloured generally on the same j)rinciple 
 which prevails at Lichfield ; the more powerful and positive tints predominate, 
 and are arranged so as to lead up to some striking point or spot of colour. In 
 one of the windows, the first from the east in the chapel, the subordinate 
 figures are rendered less conspicuous by the introduction of much white in the 
 draperies. The sky was originally many degrees paler and less positive than 
 the blue used in other parts of the picture, being rather warm grey than blue. 
 That it was intended, as at Lichfield, to relieve the more positively and deeply 
 coloured, and comparatively more solid, figures and architecture, is shown by 
 the placing of blue draperies immediately against it. In consequence, how- 
 ever, of a most unfortunate and injurious " restoration" which within the last 
 fourteen years has befallen these windows (in course of which a large propor- 
 tion of the original glazing has either been altogether removed, on the pretext 
 of being disfigured with cracks, and supplied by modern glass, or toned down 
 with an enamel colour), the skies, for the most part, have been obscured, their 
 colour also deepened and rendered more positive, to the manifest deterioration 
 of the relief of the pictures. The upper subject, indeed, of one of the chapel 
 windows appears almost as if it had been painted on a blue ground. Ignorance 
 of the extent of the restoration has probably betrayed some writers into the 
 assertion that these windows are in character flat, like the mediajval. Before 
 their restoration they were no flatter than those at Lichfield, and it is a proof 
 of the intrinsic excellence of their design that, notwithstanding the injury they 
 have sustained, they still occupy the first rank amongst glass-paintings of the 
 more powerful and efi"ective class. The most striking is, perhaps, the second 
 of the chapel windows from the east, the design of Bernard van Orley, prin- 
 cipally on account of the varied and vigorous action of the groups. At a 
 distance, however, it is less broad in efl"ect than the fourth window from the 
 east. 
 
 H. — We hope that the projected annual exhibitions of " stained glass " at 
 South Kensington may in course of time exercise a beneficial influence on the 
 practice of glass-painting in this country. The present exhibition shows the de- 
 ficiencies of our native artists, and how much they have to learn before they 
 can compete successfully with foreign schools. Whether a demand for painted 
 windows of a high class will ever be created sufficient to induce our best artists 
 to direct their attention to the subject, may be doubted. The praiseworthy 
 efforts made at Glasgow and at St. Paul's Cathedral are, it is to be feared, 
 
AT LICHFIELD CATHEDRAL. 325 
 
 efforts whicli for the present must necessarily be responded to by foreign artists 
 who have devoted their attention to the finest examples of glass-painting. It 
 cannot be supposed that a committee of management appointed by any body 
 of subscribers will ever entertain the notion of educating a school of glass- 
 painters. Their duty is simply to seek out and employ those whose works 
 offer the best guarantee of ability to execute fresh commissions. Xor are they 
 likely, if they have the interests of their constituents at heart, to submit to 
 the guidance of any artist, however distinguished, who is wholly inexperienced 
 in respect of glass-painting. The most important recent work, designed b}- a 
 late eminent Royal Academician, demonstrates that glass-painting has con- 
 ditions affecting the very nature of the composition, which must be thoroughly 
 com})reliended before a satisfactory result can be attained. 
 
 Whilst the foregoing pages were in the press, and had received the autlior's 
 revision, the jiainful intelligence of his sudden decease has reached us. This 
 sad event, full of anguish to those who best knew the excellent and amiable 
 qualities of our lamented friend, claims our most hearty condolence. All who 
 enjo3"ed his kindly intercourse, who were familiar with his generous disposition, 
 his accomplished taste and attainments in a department of art which none had 
 so successfully pursued as himself, will deeply deplore the loss of such a genial 
 spirit. We must cherish the memory of the friend taken from us in the fresh 
 energy of life, and of his wonted interest in our common pursuits — of one who 
 ever was foremost in bygone 3'ears to impart the knowledge which lie acquired, 
 or to contribute to our ratification. 
 
 From Lincolu Catliedral. 
 
XVI. 
 
 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL 
 AT WARWICK. 
 
 (A Memoir read at the Annual Meeting of the ArchEeological Institute at Warwick, 
 
 July 26, 1864.1J 
 
 OTWITHSTANDING the assistance afforded by 
 Sir William Dugdale's account of the painted 
 glass in the Beauchamp Chapel, its present shat- 
 tered and dislocated state renders it a difficult 
 task to re-arrange it, or to ascertain what parts 
 occupy their original positions, or even to form a 
 conjecture as to the nature of that which has 
 been lost. Fortunately for our investigations, the 
 glass hitherto has not been "restored," but only "repaired by 
 some ignorant glazier," as the phrase is ; but such a person I 
 have ever found to be less mischievous than even the most 
 accomplished restorer. 
 
 I will not make any long quotations from the documents of 
 which Sir William Dugdale has furnished abstracts; but the 
 following particulars will be found useful : — 
 
 It appears by the will of Richard Earl of Warwick, whose 
 executors built the chapel, and who was Lord Despencer in right 
 of his second wife,^ that he bequeathed an image of gold to the 
 shrine in the church of St. Alban, to the honoin- of God, our 
 Lady, and St. Alban ; another to the shrine of St. Thomas at 
 Canterbury ; a third to the shrine at Bridlington, in Yorkshire ; 
 and a fourth to the shrine in the church of St. Wenefride, at 
 Shrewsbury. 
 
 The contract for glazing the chapel windows was made in 1447 
 by the Earl's executors with John Prudde, of Westminster, 
 glazier.^ 
 
 1 In the absence of tlie lamented ^ [See Note A, at the end of this 
 
 author, this memoir was read, at his Memoir.] 
 
 request, by his friend, the Rev. John ^ [See Note B, at the end of this 
 
 Louis Petit. ]Memoir.] 
 
PAINTED GLASS IX BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL, WARWICK. 327 
 
 Sir William Dugdale adds that, after the windows were finished, 
 the executors caused some alterations to be made, being some 
 addition (not stated) for " Our Lady," and " scripture of the 
 marriage of the Earl." 
 
 The east window of the chapel, as the most prominent and 
 striking object, naturally arrests our attention ; it will, however, 
 assist our investio^ation of its contents, if we first take a brief 
 survey of the side windows. For it will, I fear, be found, that 
 the east window has undergone the fate of most east windows, in 
 having been made the receptacle of fragments collected from 
 other windows. Indeed I may state my belief, that of the glazing 
 of the east window, which at first sight appears so perfect, little 
 else remains in its original position than the glass in the tracery 
 lights, the four upper fig-ures in the side lights, and the small 
 fragments in the cuspidated heads of the three central lights. 
 In the accompanying diagram the original portions still in situ 
 are indicated by shading diagonally from right to left, and a 
 piece which I believe also to be original, though somewhat dis- 
 placed, is indicated by dotting, the spaces fiUed by glass inserted 
 beins: left white. 
 
 To begin with the side windows of the chapel : although the 
 remnant of the ancient glazing of these ^^indows is so scanty, 
 there is enough to indicate the original composition. 
 
 The same general design pervades the three windows on the 
 north side of the chapel, and the first ^^indov,■ from the east on 
 the south side. 
 
 The tracery lights of each window are filled with a choir of 
 angels, and each of the lower lights was originally occupied by 
 a sino-le fio-ure ^^ ith a waving: scroll above its head, which ascended 
 into the cuspidated head of the light. Of these scrolls only the 
 upper parts now remain ; but by the inscriptions on them it 
 sufficiently appears that the figures were mostly prophets or 
 patriarchs. Figures with the lower parts of such scrolls waving 
 above and about their heads are to be seen in the east window. 
 These, it can be shown, have been removed from some of the 
 side windows. Indeed it can, I think, be proved, that two of 
 the fio-ures in the east window have been removed from the first 
 window from the east on the north side, by the agreement of the 
 inscriptions on the lower parts of the scrolls with what remains 
 on the upper parts still continuing in the side window. 
 
 The lower lights had no borders, but were filled with coloured 
 grounds alternately red in one light and blue in the next. Each 
 gi'ound was ornamented with a foliaged pattern, and was divided 
 
328 
 
 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 O.i 
 
 0.2 
 
 Sl 1 
 
 r 
 
 S.2 1 
 
 1 To 
 
 Ml 1 
 
 1 ^-^ 
 
 M2 1 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 fe ^ 
 
 Ms 1 
 
 1 ^-^ 
 
 K 
 
 JJ.2 
 
 U- 
 
 ]sr 
 
 :i^' 
 
 a 
 
 Q 
 
 b\ 
 
 R 
 
 .^^^.\^ 
 
 Diagram of the East Window of the Bkauchami' Ciiatkl, WAi.vviv.,^, 
 
 The glazed portions sliuded with diag( n.il lines from right to left indicate the original glass remaining in situ , the portion 
 dotted, marked I.. 1, appears to be original glass misplaced. 
 
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL AT WARWICK. 329 
 
 by a narrow ornaraented baud — interlaced like a fret — into a 
 series of small compartments ; the red ground into lozenge- 
 shaped compartments, the blue into square compartments, in 
 which were placed alternately the founder's badges, viz., the 
 wliite ragged staff, and the white bear with a yellow chain and 
 muzzle. The figures and the scrolls were embedded in these 
 grounds, and the figures were represented standing on brackets 
 only, and not under canopies. 
 
 The remains of the coloured grounds are found in the side 
 lights, and are all in situ. They afford a means of identifying 
 figures in the east window (which retain their grounds, and some- 
 times their brackets also) with the lights in the side windows out 
 of which they have been taken. 
 
 The angels in the tracery lights of the first window from the 
 east, both on the north and south sides, are engaged with musical 
 instruments. They are placed on a blue ground powdered with 
 yellow flaming stars. 
 
 But the angels in the tracery heads of the two remaining 
 windows on the north side, and, as it would seem from the appear- 
 ance of the fragments, in the heads of the two opposite windows 
 also, were furnished with scrolls inscribed with portions of the 
 hymn supposed to bo sung by the angels, and marked with 
 appropriate notes of music adapted to some sort of instrument. 
 These scrolls most resemble the leaves of a book, and they are 
 arranged in such a manner as to present the inelegant appear- 
 ance of a series of chevrons. 
 
 The scrolls are preserved only in the middle window on the 
 north side : the inscriptions on them relate to a festival in honour 
 of the Virgin ; and the prophetic scrolls in the lower lights of 
 the same window seem to have a general reference to the coming 
 of Our Lord. 
 
 A somewhat different arrangement is adopted in the lower 
 lights of the middle window on the south side. They appear to 
 have been filled with a "multitude of the heavenly host:" in 
 some of the lights yellow rays dart upwards. The glazing in 
 the lower lights of the last window on the south side cannot be 
 considered as original. 
 
 AVe will now return to the east windoA\'. 
 
 It will be the more regular course to commence with the 
 tracery lights of this window. They are evidently designed ^nth 
 reference to some important sacred subject in the lower lights ; 
 though we find in some of them (as well as in the heraldic 
 grounds of the lower lights of the side windows already noticed) 
 
330 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 that strange admixture of objects of secular pomp and worldly 
 vanity which usually characterizes the works that we are fond of 
 attributing to " the piety of our ancestors " in the middle ages. 
 
 The upper row of tracery lights (marked A in the diagram) 
 is principally devoted to a display of the founder's motto, in 
 allusion to his marriage with a lady who eventually became 
 heiress to the great Despencer family. The whole of this motto, 
 " Louey Spencer, tant que vivray," is repeated in each pair of 
 lights ; one-half, " Louey Spencer " (^. e. praise Spencer), being 
 written on a scroll in one light, and the remainder, " tant que 
 vivray," on a scroll in the next. The lights otherwise have re- 
 ference to the sacred nature of the general design. In the upper 
 part of each light are represented clouds coloured in the lights 
 alternately blue and red, and powdered with yellow flaming stars, 
 from which clouds yellow rays descend, and are received on 
 the red or blue foliaged ground, as the case may be, on which 
 the scroll containing the motto is placed. Of the originality of 
 this glass there can be no reasonable doubt. 
 
 The next row of tracery lights (marked b in the diagram) is 
 entirely of religious design. In each is represented, on a blue 
 foliaged ground powdered with yellow flaming stars, a red seraph 
 standing on a yellow wheel, and holding a scroll of the same 
 character as the angelic scrolls in the side windows, on which is 
 set forth a portion of the " Gloria in excelsis," with musical 
 notes. The hymn commences on the left hand or north side of 
 the central part of the window, and continues across the six 
 central tracery lights. It recommences on the left hand, or north 
 side of the window, and continues across the four north tracery 
 lights ; it again recommences in the left-hand light of the south 
 side of the window, and terminates with that series. The adajD- 
 tation of the hymn to the number of lights, and the occurrence 
 of the blue ground with flaming stars, afford a proof that the 
 glass in this tier of lights is also original. 
 
 The glass in the two quatrefoils (marked c in the diagram) 
 may also be considered as original. Each quatrefoil was originally 
 occupied by a cherub, coloured yellow, on a blue foliaged ground. 
 Of the remaining tracery lights the larger ones are filled with 
 the blue ground and yellow flaming stars, and the smaller ones, 
 mere holes, with plain pieces of red or blue glass. There is no 
 reason for questioning their originality. 
 
 We can have no difficulty in concluding that the four figures 
 in the upper part of the lower lights on the sides of the window 
 (which are marked D, E, F, G, in the diagram) are also original 
 
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL AT WARWICK. 331 
 
 and in situ ; for it abundantly appears that these figures represent 
 the four saints in whose honour the Earl bequeathed the golden 
 images mentioned in his will. 
 
 The first in order on the north side of the window (marked d 
 in the diagram) is that of an archbishop, as indicated by his cross- 
 staff. The inscription formerly on the bracket supporting the 
 figure (the figures never had any canopies) is now lost; but Sir 
 William Dugdale, in his notice of the east window, states that 
 there were in his time, " besides those costly portraitures in glass 
 of Earl Richard, with his wives and children " (of which we shall 
 hear more presently), " the pictures, in their full proportion, of 
 St. Alban, the protomartyr of England ; St. Thomas of Canter- 
 bury ; St. John of Bridlington ; and of St. Wenefride." The 
 figure in question may, therefore, be considered to represent St. 
 Thomas of Canterbury. 
 
 The second figure from the north (marked E in the diagram), 
 representing a king in royal apparel, armed in plate, having a 
 blue surcoat with a yellow saltire, and bearing in his hand a 
 cross, is at once identified with Dugdale's description by " Ses 
 Alb . . . ." (Sanctus Albanus), the remains of the words inscribed 
 on the bracket supporting the figure. 
 
 The third figure from the north (in the south wing of the 
 window, and marked F in the diagram) is that of a female saint, 
 in a slate-coloured purple mantle (black is hereby indicated, but 
 Prudde was mindful of his covenant not to use black glass if he 
 could avoid it) having a jewelled border, and in a similarly- 
 coloured under-dress, and bearing a pastoral staff. * This is also 
 identified with Dugdale's description by the word " . . . . Wene- 
 frede " remaining on the bracket which supports the figure. 
 
 The fourth figure (marked G in the diagram) we may rea- 
 sonably conclude represents St. John of Bridlington, though the 
 name on the bracket has been lost. It is that of a male saint, 
 bald-headed, in a slate-coloured purple cope and white surplice, 
 and holding a pastoral staff. In scale and general character it 
 entirely accords with the other three figures. 
 
 The figiu-es of St. Thomas and St. John are on red grounds ; 
 those of St. Alban and St. Wenefride are on blue ; each ground 
 being divided into compartments and ornamented with the 
 founder's badges, the bear and the ragged staff, like the grounds 
 in the side windows. The order of the arrangement of the 
 colours of these grounds — red, blue, blue, red — is a strong proof 
 not only that the figures are in situ, but also of the originality of 
 the glass which occupies the cuspidated heads of the three central 
 
332 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 lower lights. For it will be found, that of these three lights the 
 two outer ones had red grounds, and the inner or central light an 
 exterior blue ground — an arrangement which would produce an 
 alternation of red and blue grounds across the lower lights of the 
 window thus : — 
 
 I Red I Blue || Red | Blue | Red || Blue | Red | 
 
 The glass in the cuspidated heads of the three central lower 
 lights would appear to have belonged to some large subject. It 
 seems to have immediate reference to some design which con- 
 sisted of three glorified figures, the centre one of which was 
 either larger than the others or was raised above them. For the 
 glass in the centre light (marked i in the diagram) represents 
 the upper part of a nimbus (not cruciferous, as far as I could 
 ascertain), from which yellow rays proceed, and extend over a 
 red ground next the nimbus and over a blue ground beyond ; 
 which blue ground occupies the remainder of the space as far as 
 the stonework will allow. This blue ground is painted to repre- 
 sent clouds, and is powdered with yellow flaming stars. 
 
 The glass in the two outer central lights (marked H and k in 
 the diagram) represents only yellow rays traversing a red ground, 
 and these rays, it is evident from their less divergence as compared 
 with those in the centre light, proceeded from some point lower 
 down in each light than the nimbus in the middle light. 
 
 We probably should conjecture rightly if we supposed that the 
 subject of which these fragments formed part consisted of some 
 })rominent piece of Marian symbolism. The chapel is dedicated 
 to the Bless'ed Virgin ; and she was one of the holy persons 
 intended to be honoured by the Earl's bequest of a golden image 
 to the shrine of St. Alban. But, in order to ascertain whether 
 any other portions of the glass now in the window belonged to 
 such a subject, a consideration of the space which it may be 
 supposed to have occupied becomes necessary ; and in this we 
 must particularly attend to what Sir William Dugdale says as to 
 the state of the window in his time. 
 
 In his ' Antiquities of Warwickshire ' there is an engraving of 
 eight kneeling figures, the portraits, as appears from the inscrip- 
 tions which accompany them, of Earl Richard, the founder ; of 
 his first Countess, Elizabeth, and her three daughters, Margaret, 
 Eleanor, and Elizabeth ; and of his second Countess, Isabella, 
 and her two children, Ileniy, first Duke of Warwick, and the 
 Lady Anne. Among these inscriptions we may recognise the 
 '' scripture of the marriage of the Earl," added by the Earl's 
 executors after the completion oi' the v/indows. 
 
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL AT WAEWICK. 333 
 
 These portraits are arranged on the page m three rows — the 
 upper one consisting of the effigy of the Earl between those of 
 his two wives. But this arrangement, though the most conve- 
 nient for the engraver, we may be certain was not the arrange- 
 ment of the figures in the window. All analogy points to the 
 conclusion that these portraits were placed in the window in a 
 single row — a supposition which, indeed, is strengthened by the 
 attitudes of the figures in the engraving. The Earl, who is 
 represented in profile, looks towards the spectator's left, which, 
 if the figure were in the window, would in reality be facing 
 the north. His first Countess and lier three daughters look in the 
 same direction as the Earl ; whilst the second Countess faces 
 the Earl, and consequently would look towards the south, to which 
 point also her son and daughter turn. So that, if the figures are 
 supposed to be in the window, and there placed in a single ro^^ , 
 the Earl, his first Countess, and her three daughters ^^ould look 
 towards the north, and face his second Countess, her son and 
 daughter, who would look towards the south. 
 
 The difficulty is to determine whether these figures were 
 arranged in a row which continued uninten-uptedly across the 
 whole window, or which was divided into two portions and 
 confined to the outer lights, under the figures of St. Thomas, 
 St. Alban, St. AYenefride, and St. John. 
 
 Of course, if our opinion should be in favour of the continuity 
 of the row, the space to be allotted to the central subject ^^ ill, as 
 a necessary result, be greatly diminished. 
 
 If we could, with absolute certainty, identify the figure in the 
 lower part of the middle light of the window (marked l 1 in 
 the diagram) with the effigy of the founder delineated in the 
 engraving given by Dugdale, its size, coupled with the appear- 
 ance of the engraved figures, might solve the question. For the 
 figm-e in the window, with its tent-like canopy of state of which 
 the remains exist, is on a scale sufficient to occupy the entire 
 breadth of the light. Such dimensions must have given rise to 
 great crowding of the figui-es, if we suppose that they were all 
 upon the same scale and were confined to the four lights in the 
 wings of the window. That they were of the same size, appears 
 from the engraving which is given by Dugdale ; and all analogy 
 would confirm that supposition, for the son and daughters were 
 grown persons when the glass was put up. And that the figures 
 were not so greatly crowded together as must have been the case 
 had they been confined to four lights, also appears fi'om the 
 
334 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 engraving, where each figure is represented separately, and with 
 the whole of its heraldry shown ; which the engraver could hardly 
 have supplied had they very much overlapped each other. I 
 say, had they very much overlapped each other, because, even 
 according to the theory of a continuous row, two of the Earl's 
 daughters by his first wife must liave occupied one light ; but, 
 according to the contrary theory, five figures on one side of the 
 window at least must have been crowded into two lights. I think 
 that it is more probable that the figures were disposed in a con- 
 tinuous row which extended across the entire window, and that 
 the founder was placed in the middle light, his Countesses in the 
 lights on each side, his three daughters by his first wife in the two 
 south outer lights, and his son and daughter by his second wife 
 in the corresponding lights on the north side. It is probable 
 that the canopies of state in the three middle lights were a little 
 taller than those in the outer lights ; and if the theory of a con- 
 tinuous row of figures is correct, w^e may reasonably conclude 
 that the effigies occupied in the centre lights the spaces marked 
 in the diagram L 1 and 2, m 1 , 2, and 3, and N ; and in the side 
 lights the spaces marked o 1 and 2, p, q, and e, immediately 
 under the figures of St. Thomas, St. Alban, St. Wenefride, and 
 St. John ; which would leave, as the space available for the prin- 
 cipal subject, that marked in the diagram s 1 and 2, t 1 and 2, 
 and u 1 and 2. 
 
 The difficulty felt in identifying the existing figure in the 
 middle liglit witli the engraving of the founder's effigy arises 
 from a discrepancy in the heraldry on the dresses of the two 
 figures. The arms represented on this figure in the engraving 
 given by Dugdale are the quartered coat of Beaucliamp and 
 Newburgh. Those on the figure in the window consist of the 
 same coat with an inescutcheon of pretence of Despencer. 
 The latter arms would no doubt be the Earl's proper coat after 
 his second wife became heiress of the Despencer family ; and I 
 can account for the discrepancy only by supposing, either that 
 the figure in the window belongs to another series of effigies in the 
 chapel, which is improbable both from Sir William Dugdale's 
 silence and the absence of any allusion to the founder in the 
 tracery of the side windows, or else that the engraver by accident 
 omitted the Despencer inescutcheon. Sir William Dugdale has 
 left no description of the arms in addition to the engravings; 
 and there is this circumstance which seems to impugn the en- 
 graver's accuracy, that in the plate the Despencer inescutcheon 
 
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL AT WARWICK. 335 
 
 (omitted in the Earl's arms) is made to appear iu tlie arms of 
 the Lady Eleanor, the second daughter of the Earl's first wife, 
 who was heiress of Lord Berkeley, as well as (properly) in the 
 arms of the Lady Anne, daughter of the Earl's second wife, who 
 was ultimately heiress of the Despencer family. The figure, 
 which is much mutilated, is turned, like that in the engraving, 
 towards the north, and has evidently been placed under a canopy 
 of state. The head of the figure is lost, and has been replaced 
 by that of a lady, perhaps one of the female elSgies. The canopy 
 has lost its ujDper part, and the whole subject has been thrust 
 upwards above its proper position in the window. 
 
 With the exception of two subjects which I shall presently 
 notice, I think that we shall have no difficulty in concluding 
 that of the remainder of the glass in the window none formed 
 part of the original design ; and that, with regard to these two 
 subjects, strong groimds may be adduced for the belief that they 
 have been removed from some other windows in this chapel. 
 
 To commence with the three lower centre lights of the window : 
 the subject in the north light (marked s 1 in the diagram) is the 
 upper part of the figure of St. EUzabeth. On the portion of 
 the scroll which remains above the head of the figure is part 
 of the forty-third verse of the first chapter of St. Luke's Gospel ; 
 and the residue of the scroll with the remainder of the vei-se is, 
 I think, in the cuspidated head of the next light but one to 
 the east of the first ^^ indow from the east on the north side of the 
 chapel. This glass is an insertion. What at first appears to be 
 the lower part of the saint (marked s 2 in the diagTam) is, in 
 fact, the lower part and feet of another figure on a larger scale 
 than was that of St. Elizabeth, and probably the remains of the 
 figure of a prophet or patriarch. Another ground for concluding 
 that the glass in question is an insertion consists in the fact, that 
 the nimbus is plain and not radiated, and that the red background 
 to the figure, instead of being plain red, like that in the cuspi- 
 dated head of the light, is reticulated and ornamented with the 
 bear and the ragged staff. 
 
 The subject in the south light (marked u 1 in the diagram) is 
 the upper part of the figure of the Blessed Virgin. On the 
 portion of the scroll which remains above the head of the figure 
 is part of the forty-eighth verse of the first chapter of St. Luke ; 
 and the residue of the scroll with the remainder of the verse is, I 
 think, in the cuspidated head of the light nearest the east of the 
 same window on the north side of the chapel to which the figure 
 
336 TPIE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 of St. Elizabeth belonged, and from which this figure also must 
 have been taken. Another ground for concluding that it is an 
 insertion in the east window consists in the fact, that its back- 
 ground is not red, like the ground in the cuspidated head of the 
 light above, but blue ; and moreover it is reticulated and orna- 
 mented with the founder's badges : both which features would be 
 correct if this figure stood, as I have supposed, next to that of 
 St. Margaret in the window on the nortli side of the chapel. 
 What appears to be the lower part and feet of this figure (and 
 occupies the space marked u 2 in the diagram) really belongs to 
 a different figure ; which last, from the mscription on a scroll at 
 the bottom of the bracket beneath, appears to be that of the 
 prophet Amos. 
 
 The subject in the middle light (marked T 1 in the diagram) 
 is the upper part of the figure of a prophet or patriarch. The 
 figure holds a small scroll rolled up, to which allusion is made in 
 the inscription " . . . . non aperietur " on the scroll which 
 waves above the head of the figure. It is clearly an insertion : 
 the ground is blue ornamented with the founder's badges. The 
 low^er part or feet (marked T 2) in the diagram belong to another 
 figure, which appears from the inscription of the bracket to have 
 been that of the prophet Isaiah. 
 
 The two subjects concerning \vhich I think the greatest diffi- 
 culties must be felt to exist are the following. It will be most 
 convenient to commence with that in the lower part of the 
 southern central light (which is marked N in the diagram). 
 
 The subject here represented is the Blessed Virgin. She is 
 kneeling, and turned towards the north side of the window. 
 The hands are crossed upon her breast; the eyes and counte- 
 nance are downcast. Above the head of the figure is a red 
 cloud, from which yellow rays diverge, ST)reading themselves over 
 a blue ground powdered with yellow flaming stars, down to the 
 shoulders of the figure. It is habited in a mantle and close-fitting 
 under-garment, the upper part or body of which is richly jewelled, 
 and the lower part or skirt is purple, powdered with small 
 roundels, each representing yellow rays issuing from a blue 
 cloud. The nimbus is red. This figure, which is of a larger 
 size than any of the four original figures in the window, but is 
 on the same scale as the figures of some prophets or patriarchs 
 in the lower part of the window, which clearly have belonged to 
 some of the side windows, may, from its appearance, have formed 
 part of the subject of the Annunciation, or of the Coronation of 
 
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL AT WARWICK. o37 
 
 the Blessed Virgin. If the latter, \\e might be inclined to tliink 
 that we had at last discovered some part of the subject which 
 occupied the upper portion of the central lights. 
 
 But the space required for the representation of a Coronation 
 of the Virgin, on such a scale as the size of the present figure 
 would demand, would gi'eatly exceed the limits necessarily pre- 
 scribed by the adoption of the theory of a continuous row of effigies 
 across the window. Though I fully admit the difficulties whicli 
 sm-round the subject in whatever light it is regarded, I think 
 that, upon the a\ hole, it is less easy to conceive that this figure 
 formed part of the missing central subject, than that it belonged 
 to one of the side windows of the chapel. 
 
 In the most northern of the central lights (at the spot marked 
 M 1 in the diagram) is a head of Christ crowned with thorns and 
 surrounded with a cruciferous nimbus. The countenance, which 
 is turned towards the south, looks downwards. The scale of this 
 head is the same as that of the last-mentioned figure. AVhether 
 tliis head was originally on a blue background traversed with 
 yellow diverging rays, I am unable to say; but, on a close 
 inspection, it appears that the blue ground we now see is 
 made up of fragments of glass once used for draperies, and 
 that the greater part, at all events, of the existing yellow rays 
 has been cut from fragments of yellow glass originally used 
 for other purposes. This modern work may have been done in 
 repairing an original design, and it may have been devised with 
 the intention of producing an effect in conformity with that of 
 the radiated ground above the figure of the Virgin in the 
 opposite light. 
 
 The remains of a figure, which are just beneath this head (and 
 occupy the space marked M 2 in the diagram), appear not to 
 have belonged to the head in question. About the shoulders 
 there is a portion of background, red, diapered, and powdered 
 with yellow flaming stars. The background to the remaining 
 portion of the figure is blue, divided into small squares, and 
 ornamented with the founder's badges. The rest of the light 
 (marked M 3 in the diagram) is filled with remains of a third 
 figure. 
 
 My impression is that the head of Christ belonged to one of 
 the side windows, as well as the rest of the glass, with the excep- 
 tion perhaps of the fragment of the rod background, which is 
 powdered with yellow stars. This, indeed, may have belonged 
 to the upper part of the middle light. 
 
 z 
 
338 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 There seems to be no difficulty in supposing that the remainder 
 of the glass does not belong to the east window. 
 
 The space below the kneeling figure of the Earl (marked L 2 
 in the diagram) is filled with fragments, amongst which is a 
 portion of foliage with red fruit intermixed, which may have 
 belonged to a painting of the Temptation of our first parents — 
 if there were such a subject — in any one of the side windows. 
 
 To proceed to the glass in the lower parts of the outer lights : 
 that immediately below the figure of St. Thomas (in the space 
 marked o 1 in the diagram) consists of the upper portion of the 
 figure of a patriarch or prophet. This figure is on the same 
 scale as that of tlie Virgin and the head of Christ in the spaces 
 marked N and M 1 in the diagram. It is evidently too large for 
 the place it occupies, for, if complete, it would extend about one- 
 fourth of its length below the sill of the window. There can, 
 therefore, be no reasonable doubt that this glass belonged to one 
 of the side windows. Above the head of the figure is a wavy 
 scroll, in tliis instance complete, but without any inscription. 
 The background is red divided into lozenges, and ornamented 
 with the founder's badges. What appears to be the lower part 
 of the figure (and occupies the space marked o 2 in the diagram) 
 is, in fact, a portion of another. 
 
 The subject which occuj)ies the next light (in the space marked 
 p in tlie diagram) is the upper portion of a prophet, as appears 
 from the part of the scroll that remains above its head, and the 
 inscription upon it. It is evident that this figure is not in situ, 
 it being too large for the place. If completed by the addition 
 of its lower part and feet, the figure would reach below the sill of 
 the window to a distance equal to one-fourth the height of the 
 figure. It is upon a blue ground divided into squares, and orna- 
 mented with the founder's badges. Without doubt it belonged 
 to one of the side windows. 
 
 On the south side of the window the lower part of the light 
 (marked Q in the diagram) is filled with fragments, consisting 
 principally of the remains of two figures, each on such a scale as 
 would render them, if completed, about one-fourth too long for 
 the light. We may therefore conclude that they belonged to 
 one of the side windows. The ground is red divided into squares, 
 and ornamented with the founder's badges. 
 
 The remaining part of the window (marked E in the diagram) 
 is occupied with a portion of the figure of a prophet or patriarch, 
 which, if completed by the addition of its lower part and feet, 
 
BEAITHAMP CHAPEL AT WARWICK. 339 
 
 would, like the others, be too tall for the light. It may there- 
 fore be considered to have been removed from one of the side 
 windows. The background is red divided into lozenges, and 
 ornamented with the founder's badges. 
 
 Such is the best account that I have been able to furnish of 
 these most interesting windows. It is unavoidably dry and 
 technical, and possibly some of the positions which I have ad- 
 vanced will not meet with ready acceptance. I shall, however, 
 be sufficiently repaid for the pains I have taken if my survey of 
 the glass should in any degree facilitate the labours of others. 
 
 In conclusion I will add a few observations on the general 
 character of the glazing. 
 
 In the contract with the Earl's executors, John Prudde, the 
 glazier, amongst other things, undertook to employ no English 
 glass, but to glaze all the windows with the best foreign glass 
 that was procurable in England ; to use the best colours, and as 
 little white, green, and black glass as possible. Designs on paper 
 were to be delivered to him by the executors, which were to be 
 fresh traced and pictured in rich colours by another painter at 
 Prudde's expense, from which the glass-paintings were to be 
 executed. The whole cost of painting and fixing was to be at 
 the rate of 2s. per superficial foot, which would be equal to about 
 II. 4:S. present money. 
 
 I imagine that the use of foreign glass at this period was not 
 unfrequent. For I cannot perceive that the material used in 
 these windows differs in texture or tone from much other glazing 
 of the same date with which I am familiar. The small effect 
 that the weather has had on it proves it to be a very hard kind 
 of glass ; but glass of an equally hard nature and of the same 
 date may be seen elsewhere. Nor is there anything remarkable 
 in the quality of the colours. Prudde, indeed, seems to have 
 been a man of sounder taste than his employers ; for, not\\ith- 
 standing their objection to the use of white and of green glass, 
 he seems to have used each colour without stint. In point of 
 general execution his work is a very good average specimen of 
 the period. It is brilliant, rich, harmonious, and solid, and as 
 flat and confused as the contemporary glass-paintings and paint- 
 ings in oil or water-colour always are. To have been otherwise 
 at that time would have been impossible ; for the art of producing 
 relief in any kind of painting was then imknown ; its discovery 
 was reserved for a later period. Once known, the practice was 
 adopted with equal eagerness by the artists in glass-painting, and 
 
 Z.2 
 
340 THE PAINTED GLASS IN THE 
 
 by tlie artists who worked in oil or water-colour ; and during the 
 period when modern art touched perfection, the different means 
 of representation were each faithfully worked out according to 
 its own peculiar laws. In Prudde's work we recognise the 
 influence which tlie general art of his period exercised on his 
 own, just as we see in the next century the glass-paintings 
 influenced by the progress of the Renaissance. It is surprising 
 to me that persons should ever fall into the error of supposing 
 that there is any necessary or scientific connection between glass- 
 painting, w4iich look as if they had been " ironed out flat," and 
 Gothic architecture. Flatness was the fault of the art of repre- 
 sentation in painting generally in Prudde's time. The flatness 
 of his own work is evidently the result of his ignorance of a better 
 method, and not of intention. 
 
 The members of the Institute will have an opportunity on their 
 visit to liichfield of comparing the effect of these glass-paintings 
 with that of glass-paintings about one hundred years later. I 
 shall not anticipate their judgment by any remarks. I Avill 
 only recommend them to prepare themselves for the occasion 
 by studying the example under consideration, and noting its 
 defects as well as its merits. If the state of modern glass- 
 painting in England is deplorable, as an examination of the 
 specimens now exhibited at South Kensington abundantly proves 
 it to be, we should remember that the fault lies rather with the 
 patrons of the art than with its professors. A general truth is 
 involved in the verse — 
 
 " The Drama's laws the Drama's patrons give." 
 
 * 
 
 The correction of this Memoir and its preparation for the 
 press were among the last labours of the lamented author, of 
 whom a sudden and unforeseen stroke has deprived us. Though 
 a learned, careful, sound, and acute archaeologist in many 
 branches of the science, lie was best known from his studies in 
 the art of glass-painting, in regard to which his reputation was 
 European. Of this art he not only investigated and illustrated 
 the history and principles, but endeavoured, we may hope with 
 some success, to restore it, not in a spirit of mere imitation, but 
 as a living and progressive art, and to raise its standard to a 
 level with those acknowledged by artists both in painting and in 
 sculpture. Much remained for him to do had he been spared 
 longer ; but he has laid a foundation on which others may 
 
BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL AT WARWICK. 311 
 
 securely build. With liis refined taste and sound judgment was 
 combined a technical knowledge, not merely of the treatment 
 but of the actual manufacture of the material. His drawings of 
 glass-paintings are unique. In character and expression, force, 
 truth, purity, and brilliance of colour, as well as in the represen- 
 tation of the texture of the glass, they are unparalleled. They 
 are, in fact, as perfect fac-similes of the originals as can be pro- 
 duced by water-colour upon paper. 
 
 J. L. P. 
 
 A. — Piichard Earl of Warwick, who founded the Beaiichamp chapel, in 
 which he was interred, and died 30th April, 1439, was son and heir of 'J'homas 
 Earl of Warwick, by Margaret daughter of William Lord Ferrers of Groby. 
 He married, first, Elizabeth daughter and heiress of Thomas Lord Berkeley, 
 by whom he left three daughters : ]\Largaret, who was the wife of the famous 
 John Talbot Earl of Shrewsbury ; Eleanor, who married first Thomas Lord 
 Boos, and secondly Edmund Beaufort Marquis of Dorset and Duke of Somer- 
 set ; and Elizabeth, who married George Kevil Lord Latimer. This Earl 
 married, secondly, Isabel daughter of Thomas le Despencer Earl of Gloucester, 
 who, by the death of her brother Richard and her elder sister Elizabeth without 
 issue, became sole heir to her father. This Isabel was the widow of Eichard 
 Beauchamp Earl of Worcester, the cousin of the Earl, who had a special dis- 
 |)ensation from the Pope to marry her. By her he left issue Henry his son 
 and heir, afterwards Duke of Warwick, and one daughter, Anne, who became 
 the wife of Sir Eichard Nevil. 
 
 B. — An abstract of the covenants between the executors of the Earl and the 
 several artists emplo3'ed in the erection and decoration of the chapel and tomb 
 is given by Dugdale, ' Antiquities of Warwickshire,' edit. 1656, of which the 
 following is an extract, so far as relates to the glass : — " John Pnidde, of West- 
 minster, glasier, 23 Junii, 25 H. 6, covenanteth, &c., to glase all the windows 
 in the new Chappell in Warwick with Glasse beyond the Seas, and with no 
 Glasso of England; and that in the finest wise, with the best, cleanest, and 
 strongest Glasse of beyond the Sea that may be had in England, and of the 
 finest colours of blew, yellow, red, purpure, sanguine, and violet, and of all 
 other colours that shall be most necessars^ and best to make rich and embellish 
 the matters, Images, and stories that shall be delivered and appointed by the 
 said Executors by patterns in paper, afterwards to be newly traced and pictured 
 by another Painter in rich colour at the charges of the said Glasier : All which 
 proportions the said John Prudde must make perfectly to fine, glase, eneylin it, 
 and finely and strongly set it in lead and souder, as well as any Glasse as in 
 England. Of white Glasse, green Glasse, black Glasse, he shall put in as little 
 as shall be needfull for the shewing and setting forth of the mattei's, Images, 
 and storyes. And the said Glasier shall take charge of the same Glasse, 
 wrought and to be brought to Warwick, and set up there, in the windows of 
 the said Chapell ; the Executors paying to the said Glasier for cveiy foot of 
 Glasse ii.s., and so for the whole xcii*. i.s. x.c?. 
 
 "It appeareth that, after these windows were so finished, the executors 
 devised some alterations, as to adde for our Lady, and scripture of 
 
342 PAINTED GLASS IN BEAUCHAMP CHAPEL, WAEWICK. 
 
 the marriage of the Earle, and procured the same to be set forth in Glasse 
 in most fine and curious colours ; and for the same they payd the sum of 
 xm.U. vi.s. iv.d. Also it appeareth that they caused the windows in the vestry 
 to be curiously glased with Glasse of ii.s. a foot, for which they payd l.s. 
 The sum totall for the Glass of the said Vestry and Chappell, xvi.Z*. xviii.s. vi.c?., 
 Avhich in all contain by measure ; 
 
 " The East window, cxlix. foot, i. quarter, and two inches. 
 
 " The South windows ccccclx. foot, xi. inches. 
 
 " The North windows cccv. foot. 
 
 " The totall dccccx. foot, iii. quarters of a foot, and two inches." 
 
 From St. Mary'8 Redcliffe, Bristol. 
 
A CATALOGUE 
 
 OF 
 
 DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS 
 
 BY THE LATE 
 
 CHAELES WINSTON.^ 
 
 Amis, Arclibishop "Warham, 
 impaled with tliosc of the Sec/ 
 
 Anns, King Henry YII. 
 
 Arms, INIerehant Venturers . . 
 
 Arms, Bathurst impaling Ran- 
 dolph. 
 
 Crest, Bathurst 
 
 Archbishop, supposed to be 
 Archbishop Simon de Meop- 
 ham. 
 
 Royal badges 
 
 Fi-agments 
 
 Arms of the Bowes family . . 
 
 Anns of the Butler family • . 
 
 Ai-chbishop with the pall . . 
 
 Archbishop 
 
 Crown 
 
 Bu-ds 
 
 Agnus Dei (redrawn, No. 409) 
 
 Arms, Prince Arthur . . 
 
 Arms of the Busket fomily, 
 quartered with Fitzjames. 
 
 Badge, Dawbeny 
 
 Arras, Bishop Fitzjames, im- 
 paled by Newborougli of 
 Lulworth, Dorset. 
 
 "Wlierc situate, or O^'ncr's Name. 
 
 Lambeth Palace 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Franks House, Horton Kirby, Kent 
 Ditto 
 
 Farningham Cliurch, Kent . . 
 Meopham Church, Kent 
 
 North Cray Church, Kent .. 
 North Cray Church, Kent, and 
 
 Shorcham Churcli, Sussex. 
 North Cray Church, Kent . . 
 Lullingstone Churcli, Kent .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 North Cray Church, Kent . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Newick Church, Sussex 
 North Cray Chm-ch, Kent . . 
 Fulham Palace 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 1 >ate. 
 
 1510 
 
 149.5 
 1594 
 1594 
 
 1594 
 1460 
 
 1490 
 1400 
 
 1548 
 1490 
 1290 
 1290 
 1490 
 1490 
 1230 
 1530 
 1508 
 
 1510 
 1508 
 
 ' The drawings were exhibited by the 
 Archaeological Institute, at the rooms 
 of the Arundel Society in Old Bond 
 Street, from March 2-ith to April 5th, 
 1865. They are at present temporarily 
 deposited at the South Kensington 
 Museum for public exhibition. 
 
 The present catalogue is taken from a 
 copy of a MS. catalogue in Mr. Winston's 
 handwriting, but Nvith some additions, 
 giving fuller descriptions of the draw- 
 ings, from the printed catalogue used 
 at the exhibition in Old Bond Street. 
 The dates are by Mr. Winston ; latterly 
 he ceased to assign any. 
 
 2 These arms wei'e not originally at 
 
 Lambeth, but most probably at the 
 Archbishop's palace at Otford, near 
 Sevenoaks, tiic ruins of which still 
 remain. The Rev. Benjamin Winston 
 purchased the glass at Sevenoaks about 
 the year 1830, and, on the restoration of 
 Lambeth Palace by Archbishop Howley, 
 made a present of it to him. The Arch- 
 bishop then requested him, if he met 
 with any more such glass, to purchase it 
 for him. Mr. Winston accordingly pur- 
 chased for him, also at Sevenoaks, the 
 arms of Henry VII., the subject of the 
 next drawing. Mr. Charles Winston's 
 drawing of Warham's arms bears da,te 
 December, 1830. 
 
344 
 
 A CATALOaUE OF 
 
 Subject. 
 
 20 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 24 
 25 
 26 
 27 
 28 
 29 
 30 
 31 
 32 
 33 
 34 
 35 
 
 36 
 37 
 38 
 39 
 40 
 41 
 42 
 43 
 44 
 
 45 
 
 46 
 47 
 
 48 
 
 49 
 50 
 
 51 
 52 
 53 
 54 
 55 
 56 
 57 
 58 
 59 
 60 
 61 
 62 
 63 
 64 
 
 65 
 6Q 
 
 67 
 
 Arras, King Henry VIII. 
 . j Cardinal Kemp 
 
 Bishop Savage 
 Arms / Bishop Savage .. 
 ^rms, I Bisi^op Fitzjames . . 
 
 Bird .. .. 
 
 Arms of the Bathurst family 
 
 Virgin and Child 
 
 Fish 
 
 Border of fish 
 
 Emblem of the Holy Trinity 
 Arms, Duke of Lancaster 
 Arms, Duke of York 
 Arms, Duke of Gloucester . . 
 
 Lion's head 
 
 Arms 
 
 1 and 2, Resurrection of Christ 
 Arms of England 
 
 Arms of France . . . . . . 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Emblem of Holy Trinity 
 
 Bishop 
 
 St. Peter 
 
 Circular ornament 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Emblem of St. John the Evan- 
 gelist. 
 
 I.H.S. 
 
 Ornament 
 
 St. Anne 
 
 St. Anne 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Pattern 
 
 1 and 2, arms of the Bohuns, 
 Earls of Hereford. 
 
 Grotesque animal 
 
 Canopy 
 
 Bu-d 
 
 Bird 
 
 Circular ornament 
 
 I.H.S. 
 
 Angel 
 
 Circular ornament 
 
 Cln-ist enthroned 
 
 Ch'cle 
 
 Arms, Bishop Tunstall . . 
 Emblem of St. Mark . . . . 
 Arms, Queen Elizabeth 
 Arms of Mortimer Earl of 
 
 March, 
 Arms of Sir John Pusy 
 Arms, Beauchamp Bishop of 
 
 Salisbury, 
 Arms of the Browne family . . 
 
 Crest of the Browne family . . 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Patriarch 
 
 Fulham Palace 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Eynesford, Kent 
 
 Famingham Church, Kent .. 
 Kingsdown Church, Kent .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Wanlip Church, Leicestershire . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Rothley Church, Leicestershire . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Stanford Church, Northampton- 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Fa\vkham Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Stanford Church, Northampton- 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Thaxted Church, Essex 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Kingsdowu Church, Kent .. 
 Soutiiwell Minster, Notts . . 
 
 Fulham Palace 
 
 Wrotham Church, Kent 
 
 Franks House, Horton Kirby, Kent 
 
 Ockwells House, Berks 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Reynolds Place, Horton Kirby, 
 
 Kent. 
 Ditto 
 
 Halstead Church, Essex 
 
 Great Dunmovv Church, Essex .. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
 1510 
 fl493 
 (1498 
 fl498 
 (1508 
 1490 
 1594 
 1340 
 1340 
 1340 
 1393 
 1393 
 1393 
 1393 
 1315 
 1330 
 1315 
 1335 
 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 
 1500 
 1325 
 1325 
 1335 
 
 1335 
 1335 
 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1335 
 1490 
 1490 
 1490 
 1490 
 1340 
 1230 
 1525 
 1320 
 1594 
 1455 
 
 1455 
 1455 
 
 1514 
 
 1514 
 1345 
 
 1460 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS. 
 
 345 
 
 71 
 72 
 73 
 
 74 
 75 
 76 
 
 77 
 
 78 
 79 
 
 80 
 81 
 82 
 83 
 84 
 85 
 86 
 
 87 
 88 
 89 
 90 
 91 
 92 
 
 93 
 94 
 95 
 96 
 97 
 
 98 
 
 99 
 
 100 
 
 101 
 
 102 
 103 
 
 104 
 
 105 
 100 
 107 
 
 108 
 109 
 
 110 
 111 
 112 
 113 
 114 
 115 
 116 
 117 
 118 
 119 
 
 Arms, Dureame of Essex 
 Arms of the Bourchier feimily 
 A martyrdom 
 
 The Ascension 
 
 Circle 
 
 Arra^ of the Poix family 
 Arms. Peche impaling Scrope 
 
 and Tiptoft, quarterly. 
 Arms, " Brockhull.' 
 Group of figures 
 
 Angel 
 
 Flight into Egypt 
 
 Borders and quari-ies . . 
 
 1 and 2, pattern 
 
 Grotesque animal 
 
 Christ 
 
 Arms, Berkeley 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Two circles 
 
 Bishop, 1 and 2 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Arms of the Saekvillc family 
 Arms of the Poinings fiimily 
 York and Lancaster Eose . . 
 Circular ornament 
 
 Circle (small) 
 
 Feather 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Arms, Earl of Lancaster and 
 Earl of Richmond. 
 
 Lion's head 
 
 A martyr, St. Stephen . . 
 
 Murder of the Innocents 
 
 Circle .. .. 
 Pattern . . 
 Pattern . . 
 1 and 2 pattern 
 Figure 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Lion's head 
 
 L N.R.I 
 
 St. Peter 
 
 St. Paul 
 
 Fragments 
 An archbishop 
 
 Arms 
 
 Consecration of a bishop 
 Fragments 
 
 Great Dunmow Church, Essex . . 
 Halstead Church, Essex 
 Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster 
 Abbey. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Farningham Church, Kent . . 
 
 T. P. Cox, Esq 
 
 Lullingstone Church, Kent . . 
 
 i Ditto 
 
 Belonged to the late Lord Herbert 
 of Lea, probably from tlie Saiute 
 Chapelle, Paris. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 i Ditto 
 
 Mr. Ward, C. W 
 
 Chartham Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Mr. Ward 
 
 Westonbirt Church, Gloucester- 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Merton Chapel, Oxford 
 
 German glass, belonged to the late 
 Lord Herbert of Lea. 
 
 Farningham Church, Kent . . 
 
 Shalford Church, Essex . . . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 ^Ir. Ward 
 
 French glass, belonged to the late 
 Lord Herbert of Lea. 
 
 Netteswell Church, Essex . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Chartham Church, Kent 
 
 Merton Chapel, Oxford 
 
 French glass, late Lord Herbert 
 
 of Lea. 
 Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster 
 
 Abbey. 
 
 From Cologne 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 German glass, late Lord Herbert 
 
 of Lea. 
 
 Salisbury Cathedral 
 
 Woodmansterne Church, Surrey . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Dorchester Church, Oxfordshire . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 1300 
 1320 
 1220 
 
 1220 
 1490 
 15.30 
 1520 
 
 1340 
 1210 
 
 1200 
 1180 
 1320 
 1285 
 1285 
 1460 
 1365 
 
 1365 
 1490 
 1490 
 1490 
 1283 
 1505 
 
 1440 
 1320 
 1320 
 1490 
 1180 
 
 1350 
 1450 
 1250 
 1285 
 
 12S3 
 1200 
 
 1220 
 
 1290 
 
 1505 
 
 1450 
 1520 
 1460 
 1540 
 1460 
 1285 
 1285 
 1290 
 1285 
 
346 
 
 A CATALOGUE OF 
 
 120 
 121 
 122 
 
 123 
 
 124 
 125 
 126 
 127 
 128 
 129 
 130 
 131 
 132 
 133 
 
 134 
 135 
 136 
 1371 
 
 to 
 
 140) 
 142 
 143 
 144 
 145 
 146 
 147 
 148 
 149 
 150 
 151i 
 
 to 
 
 155) 
 156 
 157 
 
 158 
 159, 
 
 *^ 
 16l| 
 
 162 
 
 163 
 164 
 165 
 166 
 167 
 168 
 169 
 170 
 171 
 172 
 173 
 174 
 175 
 176 
 177 
 178 
 179 
 
 Pattern and canopy- 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragment of border to arms , . 
 
 Arms 
 
 Badge, Prince Edward . . 
 Part of the Crucifixion . . 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Figure of Christ, tracery light 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 Head of tracery light . . 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 Tracery light, remains of 
 canopy. 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 
 Fragment of border 
 
 Badges 
 
 1 and 2, part of Tree of Jesse 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Arms, England 
 
 Tracery light, angel 
 
 Ditto, Christ and emblems . . 
 
 Ditto, nondescript beast 
 
 Ditto, arms, Clare 
 
 Ditto, ornament 
 
 Ditto, ornament 
 
 Head of a tracery light . . 
 Head and one panel of tracery 
 
 light. 
 Tracery ligl it, pattern .. 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 
 Head of a tracery light, pat- 
 tern. 
 Nondescript animal 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Tracery light, figure 
 Lower light, figure, &c. 
 Lion's head and border 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Head of lower light 
 Tracery light, lion's head 
 
 Ditto, work 
 
 Fragments .. 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Fragment of arms, England 
 Fragment of border 
 Fragment of border and quarry 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Southfleet Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Kotliley Church, Leicestershire, and 
 Mr. Ward. 
 
 Mr. Milkr 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Horton Kirby, Kent 
 
 Mr. Ward 
 
 St. Martin's-le-Grand Church, York 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Southfleet Church, Kent 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Mr. HillierSj Boley Hill, Eochester, 
 Kent. 
 
 Westwell Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Chartham Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Snodland Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .... .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. ., 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. .. 
 
 Ditto .. .* .. .. .. .. 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Sutton-at-Hone Church, Kent . . 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
 1250 
 1250 
 
 1306 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS. 
 
 847 
 
 180 
 181 
 182 
 183 
 184 
 185 
 186 
 187 
 188 
 189 
 
 190 
 191 
 
 192 
 
 193 
 
 193a 
 
 194 
 
 195 
 
 196 
 
 196a 
 
 197 
 198 
 199 
 
 200 
 
 201 
 
 202 
 
 203 
 204 
 205 
 206 
 207 
 208 
 209 
 
 210 
 
 211 
 212 
 
 213 
 214 
 215 
 
 216 
 217 
 218 
 219 
 220 
 221 
 222 
 223 
 
 Two female heads 
 
 Tracery light, pattern . . 
 Lower light and arms (France) 
 Figure and canopy 
 Lower light, arms (Clare) .. 
 Head of lower light 
 
 Border 
 
 Figure 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 1 and 2, figure and canopy . . 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Marriage in Cana of Galilee 
 
 Consecration of a church 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Head of Christ 
 
 Lower light, pattern 
 
 Figure and canopy. On tho 
 scroll is written, " Magister 
 Henricus do Mansfield me 
 fecit." 
 
 Female figure 
 
 Heads 
 
 Head of St. James 
 Tracery light, figure 
 
 Circle, figures. On the scroll is 
 written, " If ani man thirst, 
 come to mo and drinck." 
 
 Quarry (Peche) 
 
 Arms 
 
 Thaxted Church, Essex 
 
 Sible Hedingham Church, Essex 
 
 Selling Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 French glass, belonged to the late 
 
 Lord Herbert of Lea. 
 O.W 
 
 Female head . . 
 Male head 
 Tracery lights 
 Tracery liglit . . 
 Tracery lights 
 Fragments 
 Fragments and 
 
 lights. 
 Hosea 
 
 two tracery 
 
 Three quarries 
 Angel and harp 
 
 St. James and canopy . . 
 
 Pattern .. 
 
 A window head. On scroll 
 " Ecce Agnus Dei." 
 
 Borders 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Border, &c 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Cherub 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Border 
 
 French glass, belonged to tho late 
 Lord Herbert of Leo. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Merton College Chapel, Oxford . . 
 Ditto 
 
 German glass, belonged to the late 
 
 Lord Herbert of Lea. 
 
 French glass, ditto 
 
 Stowting Church, Kent 
 Belonged to the lato Lord Herbert 
 
 of Lea. 
 Lullingstone Church, Kent . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Belonged to late Lord Herbert of 
 
 Lea. 
 Worfield Church, Salop 
 Ditto 
 
 Worfield Church, Salop 
 
 French glass, belonged to late Lord 
 
 Herbert of Lea. 
 Burleigh House and Mr. "Ward . . 
 German glass, belonged to late Lord 
 
 Herbert of Lea. 
 Stanton Harcourt Church, Oxon . . 
 
 Merton College Library, Oxford . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. .. .. 
 
 Kingsdown Church, Kent 
 Wichfont Church, Wilts 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Westminster Abbey 
 Worfield Church, Salop 
 
 1250 
 
 1500 
 1510 
 
 1290 
 
348 
 
 A CATALOGUE OF 
 
 224 Inscription 
 
 225 Tracery light 
 
 226 Prince Arthur 
 
 227 The Princess Ehzabeth of 
 
 York, afterwards Queen 
 of Henry VII., and her 
 sisters. 
 
 228 Traceiy light 
 
 229 Arms of Queen Mary and 
 
 Philip of Spain. 
 
 2.30 Crown 
 
 231 Figure of a saint 
 
 232 Arms of England . . . . . . 
 
 233 Virgin and ChUd 
 
 234 Part of canopy . . . . 
 
 235 Ditto and part of figure 
 
 236 Ditto and part of figure 
 
 237 Kneeling figures 
 
 238 Kneeling figures 
 
 239 Head of a window canopy . . 
 
 240 SS. Catherine and Margaret . . 
 
 241 Rose, tracery light 
 
 242 Rose, tracery light 
 
 243 St. Magdalene 
 
 244 St. Sitha 
 
 246 Arms of Margaret Countess 
 
 of Buren, a.d. 1534-1539. 
 
 247 Head of window 
 
 248 Circular ornament 
 
 249 Border 
 
 250 Quarries, &c 
 
 251 Part of canopy 
 
 252 Part of canopy 
 
 253 Tracery light 
 
 254 Tracery light 
 
 255 Tracery light 
 
 256 Swiss glass 
 
 257 Shield 
 
 258 Tracery light 
 
 259 Head (David) 
 
 260 Border 
 
 261 Border 
 
 262 Quarry 
 
 263 Pattern on drapery 
 
 264 Border 
 
 265 Arms, Cardinal Beaufort 
 
 266 Border 
 
 267 Emblem of Virgin Mary 
 
 268 Quarries 
 
 268a Quariy .. .. 
 
 269 Border .. .. 
 
 270 Fragments 
 
 271 Hand .. 
 
 272 Quarries . . 
 
 273 Pattern 
 
 Little Malvern Church, Worcester- 
 shire. 
 
 Kingsdown Cliurch, Kent . . 
 
 Little Malvern CJmrch, Worcester- 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Dennington Church, Suffolk 
 Wilton House, Wilts 
 
 Unknown 
 
 Selling Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Stowting Church, Kent . . 
 
 Ditto , 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Mells Church, Somersetshire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Lichfield Cathedral 
 
 Acton Cliurch, Statfordsliire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Norbury Church, Derby sliire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Mells Church, Somersetshire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 In the possession of Albert Way, 
 Esq. 
 
 Mells, Somersetshire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Fail-ford Church, Gloucestershire 
 
 Wraysbmy Church, Bucks . . 
 
 Norbury Cliurch, Derbyshire 
 
 Charuwood Forest, Leicestershire 
 
 Stowting Church, Kent 
 
 St. Cross Church, near Winton . . 
 
 Refectory, St. Cross 
 
 St. Cross Clim'ch 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Now in the cloisters of Winchester 
 College, originally in the chapel 
 of New College, Oxford. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 1554 
 
 1550 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS. 
 
 349 
 
 274 
 
 275 
 276 
 277 
 278 
 279 
 280 
 
 281 
 282 
 283 
 
 284 
 
 285 
 286 
 
 287 
 
 288 
 288a 
 289 
 290 
 
 291 
 292 
 293 
 294 
 
 295 
 
 296 
 297 
 298 
 299 
 300 
 
 301 
 302 
 303 
 304 
 305 
 306 
 307 
 308 
 309 
 310 
 311 
 312 
 313 
 314 
 315 
 316 
 317 
 318 
 319 
 320 
 321 
 322 
 323 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Quarries and pattern 
 
 Head 
 
 Letters 
 
 Ornaments, &c 
 
 Letters 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Christ bearing tlio Cross 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Badge, Henry VII 
 
 Arms 
 
 Lion's head 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Patterns 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Arms of England 
 
 Arms of Eleanor of Castile, 
 Queen of Edward I. 
 
 Christ 
 
 Quarries, &c. (144) 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Pattern on drapery 
 
 Heads 
 
 Cherub 
 
 Inscription 
 
 Virgin Mary 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quariy 
 
 Border, French glass . . 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Crown 
 
 Heads and border 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Fragment of canopy 
 
 Crozier 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Female head 
 
 Heads and pattern 
 
 Head 
 
 Figure and part of light 
 
 Head 
 
 Inscription 
 
 Borders, &c 
 
 Quarries and pattern 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Badge, Cardinal Kemp 
 
 Fragment of arms 
 
 Border 
 
 "Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Now in the cloisters of Winchester 
 College, originally in the chapel 
 of New College, Oxford. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto. C2.) Wanlip Church, Lei- 
 cestershu-e. 
 
 Romsey Abbey, Hants 
 
 Mells, Somersetshire 
 
 Chessington Church, Surrey, and 
 Mr. Ward's. 
 
 Farningliam Churcli, Kent .. 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Miller .. 
 
 In the possession of Mr. AVard, sup- 
 posed to bo from Westminster 
 Abbey. 
 
 Winchester (from New College), 
 and Snodland Cliurch, Kent. 
 
 Snodland Chm'ch, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto, and Chartliam Church, Kent 
 
 Selling Church, Kent 
 
 In .the possession of Mr. Clutter- 
 buck. 
 
 Thaxted Church, Essex 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Wichfont Church, WHts . . . . 
 
 Formerly in possession of late 
 C. Winston. 
 
 In the possession of N. Powell, Esq. 
 
 In tlie possession of Mr. Ward . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Fairford Church, Gloucestershire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Cassington, Oxfordshire 
 
 Diirweston Chiu-ch, Dorsetshire .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 East window, York Minster . . 
 
 Chapter House, York Minster . . 
 
 York Minster 
 
 Snodland Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Stowting Clnirch, Kent 
 
 Kingsdown Church, Kent . . 
 
 Winchester and Westminster Abbey 
 
 St. Albans Abbey 
 
 Fulham Palace 
 
 Halsted Church, Essex 
 
 Thaxted Church, Essex 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
35Q 
 
 A CATALOGUE OF 
 
 Subject. 
 
 324 
 825 
 326 
 327 
 328 
 329 
 330 
 331 
 332 
 333 
 334 
 335 
 336 
 337 
 338 
 339 
 341 
 342 
 343 
 344 
 345 
 346 
 347 
 348 
 349 
 350 
 351 
 352 
 
 353 
 354 
 
 355 
 
 356 
 357 
 358 
 359 
 360 
 
 361 
 362 
 363 
 364 
 365 
 366 
 367 
 368 
 369 
 370 
 371 
 372 
 373 
 374 
 375 
 376 
 377 
 
 378 
 379 
 
 Border 
 
 Fragment of canopy 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Patterns, &o 
 
 Portions of heads . . . . . . 
 
 Eoses .. 
 
 Hands, &c 
 
 Borders 
 
 Fragments of a Jesse . . 
 Fragments of a Jesse . . 
 The Bourchier Knot 
 
 Border 
 
 Female head 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Merchants' mark 
 
 Quarries and borders 
 
 Borders, &c 
 
 Badge, St. John Peche . . 
 
 Eose 
 
 Border 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Head 
 
 Fragment of arms 
 
 Fragments, &c. ... .... 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Quarries and borders . . 
 Badge of Edward Prince of 
 
 Wales. 
 
 Arms, Henry VIII 
 
 Arms, Bishop Boner. Motto, 
 
 "Declina mal &facbonum." 
 Arms of the Benuct family, 
 
 Clopton, Berks. 
 Allegoric figure of November 
 Emblem of St. Mark 
 
 Arms, Warren 
 
 Arms 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Head of Christ 
 
 Canopy 
 
 St. Paul 
 
 Border 
 
 Head 
 
 Our Saviour 
 
 Angel 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Border and fragments . . 
 
 Border 
 
 Border 
 
 Infant Jesus 
 
 Part of a canopy 
 
 St. James 
 
 Quarries and border 
 
 Quarry .. 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
 Stratford Church, Essex .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Westminster Abbey 
 
 Ditto .. .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Nethereale Church, Leicestershii'e 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Sevenoaks, Kent 
 
 Belonged to the late C. Winston . . 
 In the possession of Mr. Fletcher 
 Eynesford Church, Kent 
 Farningham Churcli, Kent . - 
 Nortli Cray Church, Kent . . 
 Eothley Church, Leicestersnire .. 
 Tliaxted Cliurch, Essex 
 Lullingstone Church, Kent . . 
 In the pojisession of Mr, Ward . . 
 Belonged to the late C. Winston . . 
 In the possession of Mi'. Ward . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Fawkham Cliurch, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ash Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Andrews, 
 Ewell, Surrey. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. .. 
 
 Bilton Church, Warwickshire 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Powell . . 
 
 Ardingley Church, Sussex .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Nostel Priory, Yorkshire. Two of 
 
 the canopies are dated a.d. 1534, 
 
 A.D. 1535. 
 Thorpe Chiuch, Surrey 
 Bucldand Church, Sui-rey .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Firle Church, Sussex 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Thorpe Church, Smrey 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Frittend en Church, Kent .. 
 
 Selling Chiu-ch, Kent 
 
 Formerly hi possession of late 
 
 C. Winston. 
 In possession of E. Hailstone, Esq. 
 Late C. Winston 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS. 351 
 
 Subject. I "\Miere situate, or Owner's Name. 1 posc-d 
 
 Ddtf. 
 
 380 Koyal Badge Formerly in possession of late 
 
 ! C. Winston. 
 
 381 Ornament Formerly at Franks House, Kent 
 
 382 Head of a Pope .. .. .. Bristol Cutliedral 
 
 383 Fragments .. .. .. Ditto 
 
 384 Arms I Ditto 
 
 385 j Border I Frittenden Church, Kent . . . . 
 
 38G ' King David ; Bristol Cathedral 
 
 387 Head i East wiudow, ditto 
 
 388 Crowned head i Ditto 
 
 389 Head of Virgin Mary .. .. i Ditto 
 
 390 Head ! Ditto 
 
 391 Virgin Mary Ditto 
 
 392 Infant Jesud I Ditto 
 
 393 Fragments , Ditto 
 
 394 Fragments | Ditto 
 
 395 Fragments j Ditto 
 
 396 Love triumphant 1 Wilton, Wilts 
 
 397 Pattern. Motto " Delectaro j Portions of hall window, Be^lc 
 inDno." House, Lyddington, Kutland- 
 
 I shire. 
 
 398 Pattern. Motto "Dus exalt- I Ditto 
 
 atio mea." I 
 
 399 Quarry Ditto 
 
 400 Fragment 1 East Haddon, Northamptonshire 
 
 401 Portion of a Jesse. Figures i Leverington Church, CcUnbridge- 
 inscribed " Alnlias " and shire. 
 " Acliaz Rex." 
 
 402 Head " L^achaz rex " . . . . i Ditto 
 
 403 Tracery light | Tlion>e Church, Surrey . . . . 
 
 404 Arms of Edward the Black i St. Albans, Herts 
 
 Prince. | 
 
 405 Arms of Lionel Duke of Ditto 
 
 Clarence. [ 
 
 406 Arms of John of Gaunt .. Ditto 
 
 407 Arms ditto .. | Ditto 
 
 408 Agnus Dei ! Newick Church, Sussex 
 
 409 Agnus Dei j Ditto 
 
 410 Head j German, painted on a piece of 
 
 coated purple glass. Fonnerly 
 
 I in the possession of the late 
 [ C. Winston. 
 
 411 Head | Ditton 
 
 412 Quarry ; Shiivenham Church, Berks . . 
 
 413 Fragment of a mitre . . . . Formerly in possession of the late 
 
 C. AVinston. The blue jewel in 
 the mitre is formed of a piece of 
 blue glass stuck on the white, 
 as described in the ' Diversarum 
 Artrmn Schedula ' of Theopbilus, 
 lib. 2, chap. 28. 
 
 Arms of Peake , In possession of K. Peake, Esq. . . 
 
 Arms of Peake Ditto 
 
 Arms Bristol Cathedi-al 
 
 Quarries , From a church near Bath . . 
 
 Bristol Cathedral, taken from the 
 
 east window in 1847, but forming 
 
 no part of the original design . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 414 
 415 
 416 
 417 
 418 
 
 419 
 420 
 421 
 422 
 
 Border and fragments 
 
 Border and fragments . . 
 
 Fragments ' Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Tracery light j Ditto .. .. 
 
 Figure Ditto 
 
352 
 
 A CATALOGUE OF 
 
 423 
 424 
 425 
 
 426 
 427 
 428 
 429 
 430 
 431 
 432 
 433 
 434 
 435 
 436 
 437 
 438 
 439 
 440 
 441 
 442 
 443 
 444 
 445 
 446 
 447 
 448 
 
 449 
 
 450\ 
 
 451/ 
 
 452 
 
 453 
 
 454 
 
 455 
 456 
 457 
 458 
 459 
 460 
 461 
 462 
 463 
 464 
 465 
 466 
 467 
 468 
 469 
 470 
 471 
 472 
 473 
 474 
 475 
 476 
 477 
 478 
 479 
 480 
 
 Fragments and heads .. 
 
 Shield 
 
 I. H. S.aiicl inscription. "Hoc 
 
 est nomen quod super omne 
 
 nomen." 
 
 Shield 
 
 Shield 
 
 LH.S. 
 
 Head 
 
 Head 
 
 Mitre 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Head 
 
 Fragments .. .... 
 
 Drapery 
 
 Borders 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Figure 
 
 Borders, &c 
 
 Arms, Cobham of Sterbury . 
 Arms of the Berkeley family 
 
 Borders, &c 
 
 Quarries, &c 
 
 Fragments, &c 
 
 Border and arms 
 
 Armed figm-e (St. George ?) . . 
 
 Quarries 
 Quarries 
 Canopy 
 
 Border , 
 
 Figure of St. Michael . . 
 
 Arms 
 
 Arms, tan cross and bell 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Head and quarry . . 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Plantagenista 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Specimen of ruby glass 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Monks' heads 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
 Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Much Hadham Church, Herts 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto, south side choir 
 
 Ditto, east window, but originally 
 belonged to some other window. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Much Hadham Church, Herts .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Stanford Chm-ch, Northampton- 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 A. W. Franks, Esq 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Stowting Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Hastingleigh Church, Kent 
 Stowting Church, Kent 
 Nostel Priory, Yorkshire . . 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-rAlXTIXGS. 
 
 353 
 
 Subject. 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Dale. 
 
 481 ' Fragment 
 
 482 Heads 
 
 483 ! Part of a Jesse 
 
 484 Pattern 
 
 485 Quarries . 
 
 486 Inscription 
 
 487 Borders 
 
 488 Quarries 
 
 489 Head 
 
 490 Fragments 
 
 491 Fragments 
 
 492 Quarry and border . 
 
 493 Fragments 
 
 494 Fragments 
 
 495 Fragments 
 
 49G Quarry 
 
 497 Figure and canopy 
 
 498 I Part of a canopy 
 
 499 ' Our Saviour 
 
 500 A group 
 
 501 Arms, Berkeley family (Sir 
 Mam-ice Berkeley of Stoke- 
 Giflford, died a.d. 1347;. 
 
 502 ' Arms, Mortimer 
 
 503 Part of a Jesse 
 
 504 Head of Christ 
 
 505 1 Tracery light 
 
 506 Coat of" arms 
 
 507 St. Anthony 
 
 508 Quarry 
 
 509 Head 
 
 510 Emblem of Holy Trmity 
 
 511 Ornament 
 
 512 Head, female 
 
 513 Star 
 
 514 Head .. 
 
 515 Eoyal arms, Edward in. 
 51(5 Merchant's mark 
 
 517 Quarrv 
 
 518 Emblem of the Holy Ghost . . 
 
 519 Border 
 
 520 Inscription 
 
 521 Head 
 
 522 Tracery light 
 
 523 Fragment of a tracery light 
 
 524 Ornament 
 
 525 Figure of Clu-ist 
 
 520 Group of figures 
 
 527 Tracery hght 
 
 528 Tracery light (fetterlock) . . 
 
 529 Quarries 
 
 530 Borders and quarry- 
 SSI Border 
 
 532 Fragment 
 
 533 Inscription 
 
 534 TraceiT light 
 
 535 Tracery light 
 
 Stowting Church, Kent 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral, from various 
 panels of the south lancet win- 
 dows of the transept. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 A. W. Franks, Esq 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 German glass, formerly in posses- 
 sion of late Lord Herbert of Lea. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Long Asliton Church, Somerset- 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Winscombe Church, Somersetshire 
 St. >Lary Eedchffe, Bristol .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Lady Chapel, Bristol Cathedral . . 
 Mayor's Chapel, Bristol 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto I 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto ' 
 
 Ditto i 
 
 Conway Church, Carnarvonsihre . . t 
 
 Ditto i 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Oddingley Church, Worcestershire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Trinity Church, Coventry . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Frittenden Church, Kent . . 
 Ditto 
 
 A 
 
354 
 
 A CATALOGUE OF 
 
 536 
 537 
 538 
 539 
 540 
 541 
 542 
 543 
 544 
 545 
 546 
 547 
 
 548 
 549 
 550 
 551 
 552 
 553 
 554 
 555 
 556 
 
 557 
 
 558 
 559 
 500 
 5j1 
 
 562 
 563 
 564 
 565 
 566 
 
 567 
 568 
 569 
 
 570 
 
 571 
 572 
 573 
 
 574 
 575 
 
 576 
 577 
 578 
 579 
 
 580 
 581 
 582 
 583 
 
 Tracery light . . 
 
 Tracery liglit 
 
 Tracery liglit 
 
 Diaper pattern 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 Tracery light . . 
 
 Eose and quarries 
 
 Arms 
 
 Part of a canopy 
 
 Bird quarries 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Borders 
 
 Part of a figure 
 
 Border . . 
 
 Head of a lower light . . 
 
 Arms of England 
 
 Tracery light . . 
 
 Arms of France 
 
 Arms of Edward the Confessor 
 Fragment of a canopy . . 
 Quarry 
 
 Quarries, dated 1578 
 
 Arms, dated 1578 
 
 Fleurs-de-lis .. .. .. 
 
 Part of a figure . . . . 
 
 Tracery light .. .... 
 
 Merchant's mark . . 
 
 Merchant's mark 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Cipher, T. L. .. .. .. 
 
 Arms, Nicholas Bubwith, 
 Bishop of Wells, 1408-1424. 
 
 Arms 
 
 Arras 
 Arms 
 Fragment 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Border 
 
 Motto of Cardinal De la Marck, 
 
 " Decipimur votis, tempore 
 
 fallinuir, mors deridet curas 
 
 anxia vita nichl."' 
 Legend of St. Catherine 
 Mary Magdalene washing our 
 
 Saviour's feet. 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Arms (Arden?j 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 J)ate. 
 
 Frittenden Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ashchurch, Gloucestershire.. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Bristol Cathedral, choir windows 
 
 Li the possession of Mr. Chichester 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Possession of Eev. P. Aubertin, 
 Froyle, Hants. 
 
 Eodburn CUurch, Wilts 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Froyle Church, Hants 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 In the possession of A. W. Franks, 
 Esq. 
 
 In the possession of Eev. P. Auber- 
 tin, junior. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. ., 
 
 In the possession of Mr. J. Ward 
 
 In the possession of Eev. P. Auber- 
 tin, junior. 
 
 Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Almshouse Chapel, Wells . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Barkwell Church, Somersetshire . . 
 
 Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 In the possession of iMr. Bell, 
 Bristol. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Merton Chapel, Oxford 
 Lichfield Cathedral 
 
 West Horsley Church, Surrey . . 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Wavendon Church, Bucks .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto. There is a stratum of light 
 red glass in the midst of the blue 
 sheet seen section-wise. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 In the possession of Eev. P. Auber- 
 tin, junior. 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS. 
 
 355 
 
 584 
 
 585 
 
 586 
 
 587 
 588 
 589 
 590 
 591 
 
 592 
 593 
 594 
 595 
 59G 
 597 
 598 
 599 
 600 
 601 
 602 
 603 
 604 
 605 
 606 
 
 607 
 
 608 
 
 609 
 610 
 
 611 
 612 
 613 
 614 
 615 
 
 616 
 617 
 618 
 619 
 620 
 621 
 622 
 
 623 
 624 
 624a 
 625 
 
 626 
 627 
 628 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Bristol Cathedral 
 
 Part of a Jesse. On a scroll 
 " Ezechius ;" at the bottom of 
 the window is written "Anno 
 Domini mcccccxxxiii." 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Part of a Jesse 
 
 Borders 
 
 Borders 
 
 Arms of France 
 
 Arms 
 
 Arms 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Figure 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Geometrical pattern 
 Geometrical pattern 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Fnigmcnts 
 
 Borders 
 
 Martyrdom of St. St'phen . . 
 
 Group, Chri.st and the Apostles 
 
 Borders 
 
 Borders . . 
 Tracery light 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Fleurs-de-lis . . 
 Border 
 
 Angel Gabriel 
 
 ScroJl-works 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Crucifixion 
 
 Head 
 
 Boy 
 
 Tracery light. The Prince of 
 
 Wales's feathers and motto. 
 
 Fragments 
 
 King David 
 
 Inscription 
 
 Fragments, inscribed " lero- 
 
 nimi," "Augustini," "Gre- 
 
 gorii." 
 Arms, William of Wykeham 
 
 Arms, St. George 
 
 Arms 
 
 In the possession of Kev. P. Auber- 
 tin, junior. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Llanrhaidr Church, Denbighshire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Dyserth Church, Flintshire .. 
 
 Salisbury Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto, originally belonged to the 
 
 Chapter House. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 St. Thomas's Church, Salisbury .. 
 Salisbury Cathedral . . ./ . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 East Brent Church, Somersetshire 
 
 Salisbury Catli((h-al 
 
 Grately Cliuicli, Hants, originally 
 
 belonged to Salisbury Cathedral. 
 Formerly in the possession of the 
 
 late Lord Herbert of Lea. 
 Grately Church, Hants, originally 
 
 belonged to Salisbury Catiie- 
 
 dral. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Trumpington Ciiurch, Cambiidge- 
 
 shire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Grately Church, Hants. This 
 
 glass originally belonged to 
 
 Salisbury Cathedral. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto ;.... 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Miller . . 
 King's College Ciiapel, Cambridge 
 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Fairford Church, Gloucestershire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Llanrhaidr Church, Denbighshire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 New College, Oxford. The Hall 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 2 a2 
 
356 
 
 A CATALOGUE OF 
 
 629 Arms ^probably of the old see 
 
 of Winchester). 
 
 630 Part of a canopy 
 
 631 Fragments 
 
 632 Borders 
 
 633 Borders 
 
 634 Quarry 
 
 635 Quarry 
 
 636 Fragments 
 
 637 Fragments 
 
 638 Quarry 
 
 639 Fragments 
 
 640 Pattern 
 
 641 Tracery light 
 
 642 Sir R. Button's arms .. 
 
 643 A border 
 
 644 Lord Chief Justice Hyde's 
 
 arms. 
 
 645 Border 
 
 646 Part of a knight 
 
 647 Two heads 
 
 648 Tracery light 
 
 649 Tracery light 
 
 650 Tracery ligi it 
 
 651 Tracery light 
 
 652 Head of Christ 
 
 653 Borders 
 
 654 Quarry 
 
 655 Border 
 
 656 Ornament 
 
 657 Pattern 
 
 658 Tracery light 
 
 659 Quarry and border 
 
 6G0 Border 
 
 661 Quarry 
 
 662 Pattern 
 
 663 Pattern 
 
 604 Pattern 
 
 665 Pattern 
 
 666 Fragments 
 
 667 Borders 
 
 668 Fragments 
 
 669 Fragments 
 
 670 Pattern 
 
 671 Pattern 
 
 671a Fragments 
 
 672 Pattern 
 
 673 Pattern 
 
 674 Pattern 
 
 675 Pattern 
 
 676 Pattern 
 
 677 Pattern 
 
 678 Pattern 
 
 679 Tracery light 
 
 680 A monk 
 
 681 Tracery lights 
 
 682 Tracery lights, &c 
 
 683 Fragments 
 
 684 St. George 
 
 685 St. Chri.-topher 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
 New College, Oxford. The Hall 
 
 Wouldham Church, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Chichester 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Horfield Church, Gloucestershire 
 St. Peter's Church, Oxford .. .. 
 
 Staple Inn Flail . . . 
 Belonging to Mr. Ward 
 Middle Temple Hall . 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Warring- 
 ton. 
 
 Adderbury Church, Oxfordshue . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Merton Chapel, Oxford 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 In the possession of Mr. Lucas . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Merton College, Oxford 
 
 Stockbury CiiUrch, Kent 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Cologne Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Brocklesby Church, Lincolnshire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Takeley Church, Essex 
 
 St. Denis's Church, York 
 
 Bushbury Church, Staffordshire . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Oddinglev Church, Worcestershire 
 
 Ditto 
 
 E. Hailstone, Esq 
 
 Aldwinkle St. Peter's, Northamp- 
 tonshire. 
 
 Ditto 
 
DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAIXTIXGS. 
 
 60 
 
 Subject. 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Xame. 
 
 sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
 686 
 
 687 
 688 
 689 
 690 
 
 691 
 692 
 693 
 694 
 695 
 
 697 
 698 
 699 
 
 700 
 701 
 
 702 
 703 
 704 
 705 
 
 70r) 
 
 707 
 708 
 709 
 710 
 711 
 712 
 713 
 714 
 715 
 716 
 717 
 718 
 719 
 720 
 721 
 
 Tracery light, with kneeling 
 figure. Inscription defaced : 
 " Orate pro." 
 
 Pattern 
 
 The Saviour 
 
 Window-head 
 
 Part of the Assumption . . 
 
 Window-head . . 
 
 Border 
 
 Borders 
 
 Angels with censers 
 Tracery light . . 
 
 Figure, tracery light (St. 
 Nicholas). 
 
 Head of canopy 
 
 Head of canopy 
 
 Badge of Anne Boleyn . . 
 
 Borders . . 
 Turkish glass 
 
 Circle 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Head of our Saviom* 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Ornament 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Head of a saint 
 Head of a saint 
 Head of an archbishop . . 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Angel 
 
 Figure 
 
 Legend of St. Gregory . . 
 Head of a female . . 
 Head of a bishop . 
 Fragment of di-apery 
 
 Group 
 
 Head of a monk 
 Head of a saint 
 Emblems of St. T^Iark 
 
 St. John. 
 An angel censing . . 
 Border and Quarry 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Head of a bishop . . 
 Ancrel 
 
 and 
 
 722 
 
 723 
 
 724 
 
 725 
 
 726 
 
 727 
 
 728 
 
 729a 
 
 729^ 
 
 729i [ 
 
 730 i Pattern .. 
 
 731 \ Head 
 
 732 i Head 
 
 733 I Tracery light 
 
 f 
 
 bishop 
 
 Aldwinkle St Peter's, Northamp- 
 tonshire. 
 
 Bushbury Church. Staflbrdshire . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Aldwinkle St. Peter's, Northamp- 
 tonsire. 
 
 Stow-Bardolph Church, Norfolk . . 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral 
 
 Merton Chapel, Oxford 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral 
 
 Barnewall Ciiurch, Northampton- 
 shire. 
 
 From an early Perpendicular win- 
 dow. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Fonnerly at a farmhouse near 
 Hadley, Suffolk. 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral 
 
 Formerly in the possession of the 
 late J. Bell, Esq., M.P., from 
 Cairo; it was set in plaster 
 framework. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Dhto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Inserted in the North Rose, Lincoln 
 
 North Rose, Lincoln 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Hunsdon Church, Herts 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Salisbury Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Tours Cathedi-al 
 
 Ditto 
 
 North Moreton Church, Berks . . 
 
358 A CATALOGUE OF DRAWINGS OF GLASS-PAINTINGS. 
 
 734 
 735 
 
 736 
 737 
 738 
 739 
 740 
 741 
 742 
 743 
 744 
 745 
 
 746 
 
 747 
 
 748 
 749 
 750 
 751 
 
 752 
 753 
 754 
 755 
 756 
 757 
 758 
 759 
 760 
 761 
 
 762 
 763' 
 
 763'^ 
 763 
 l&dd 
 764rt 
 
 7645 
 764c 
 765 
 766 
 
 767 
 
 768 
 
 769 
 
 770 
 
 770a 
 
 771 
 
 772 
 
 Subject. 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Arms of Thomas Magas (a 
 foundling), Canon of Wind- 
 sor from 1520-1547 : motto, 
 "As God win." 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Figm-e and canopy 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Window 
 
 Figure 
 
 Arms of the Stafford family 
 (originally with the arms of 
 William de Bohun, Earl of 
 Northampton, 1337-1360). 
 
 Border 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Arms 
 
 Border 
 
 Border 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Quarries 
 
 Pattern 
 
 Quarry 
 
 Tracery light 
 
 Fragment 
 
 Arms of Henry Earl of Lan- 
 caster, A.D. 1327-45. 
 
 Arms .. 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Figm-e and canopy 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Figure and canopy 
 
 Pattern and arms . . 
 
 Arms of Valence and Hastings 
 
 Portion of a window .. .. 
 
 Part of a figure 
 
 A window-head . . . . . . 
 
 Group, inscribed "Voce manu 
 plaudentes," &c. 
 
 Stafford Badge .. .. .. 
 
 Emblem of St. John , . . . 
 )St. Lawrence .. 
 [Window-head.. 
 
 Arms 
 
 Fragments 
 
 Where situate, or Owner's Name. 
 
 North Moreton Church, Berks . . 
 Mr. Balchelor's house in the 
 Cloisters, Windsor Castle. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 North Moreton Chm-ch 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Salisbury Chapter-house 
 
 From the mosque of Sultan Soly- 
 
 man, Constantinople. 
 Longdon Chiu:ch, Staffordshii-e . . 
 Ditto .. .. 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Lichfield Cathedral 
 
 St. Peter's Church, St. Albans, 
 
 Herts. 
 In possession of C. H. Wilson, Esq. 
 In possession of Mr. Miller . . 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Gloucester Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto .. .. .. .. ., .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 East window, Gloucester Cathedral 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto .. 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 From the Upper Cloisters, Windsor 
 
 Castle. 
 Nettlestead Church, Kent . . 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Ditto 
 
 Now in possession of Eev. Lambert 
 Larkins, but formerly in Ayles- 
 ford Church, Kent 
 
 Florence Cathedral, in the posses- 
 sion of G. Aitcliison, Esq. 
 
 Sup- 
 posed 
 Date. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Angers Cathedral, wIikIow in, page 38. 
 
 Annealing oven, 233. 
 
 Antiquating painted glass, 45, 181. 
 
 Arrangement usual in windows of different kinds, 241. 
 
 Backgrounds in glass-paintings, 41, 127. 
 Bertini of Milan, 187, 189. 
 Blue glass. Early English, 182. 
 
 , to what the tint is due, 110, note. 
 
 • is not coloured with Lapis Lazuli, 182. 
 
 Bontemps, his remarks on the distribution of prizes in 1851, 156, note. 
 
 Brussels Cathedral, painted glass in, 188, 195, 251, 323, note. 
 
 BuU's-eye, 233. 
 
 Byzantine style, cessation of, 43. 
 
 , influence of, on glass-painting, 229, 237. 
 
 Canopies in Decorated glass-painting, 39. 
 
 splendid, in Munich Cathedral, 211. 
 
 and groups differently treated in England and on the Continent, 24-1 
 
 Capronnier, 189. 
 
 window by, at Brussels, 156. 
 
 Cartoons, remai'ks on Raphsel's, 205. 
 
 Chiaroscuro in glass-paintings, 316, 317. 
 
 Cinque-cento style, places where examples of it occur, 86, note. 
 
 , lead work in, 249. 
 
 , judicious choice of subjects in, 195, 250. 
 
 Cleaning old glass, effects of, 185. 
 
 Clearstory windows, treatment of, 59. 
 
 Colouring, effect of deep, in diminishing the size of a building, 201. 
 
 , Sir J. Eeynolds's remarks on, 199. 
 
 Conway Church, window in, 38. 
 
 Copper as a colouring matter, 226, 286, note. 
 
 Costume, media3val, copied from the antique, 219, 242. 
 
 Crowned letters, 133, note. 
 
 Cyclas, 164. 
 
 Cylinder of glass, 234. 
 
 Dalmatic, 219, 242. 
 
 Danish Raven borne by some families, 263, note. 
 Decorated style of glass-painting, remarks on, 39. 
 and Early English compared, 40. 
 
360 INDEX. 
 
 Decorated style, requisites in imitations of the, page 103. 
 
 , places where examples occur, 86 note, 107. 
 
 Dene, Peter de, his life, 265. 
 
 Eagles, double and single-headed in window at York, 277. 
 
 double-headed, origin of, 278, 281, note. 
 
 , occurrence of, on tiles, Saracenic coins, &c., 280, 281. 
 
 Early English windows, principle of the colouring of, 94. 
 
 , places where examples occur, 86, note. 
 
 Eastlake, Sir C, quoted, 205, 206. 
 
 Egington, 125. 
 
 Enamel brown, 232. 
 
 Enamel system of glass-painting, 81. 
 
 Figure and canopy windows, 238. 
 
 Flatness in glass-paintings, considered, 101, 213, 255, 310 note, 315. 
 
 , incipient change from, to rotundity, 197, 243. 
 
 Flaxman, on the abundance of Scriptural subjects, 212. 
 
 Flux, 79, 232. 
 
 Fon thill, glass from, at Bristol, 167. 
 
 Glass, mode of making, 233. 
 
 , coated, 81, 234. 
 
 , difference between ancient and modern, 148, note. 
 
 , Greek, 201. 
 
 • , Greek and Roman coloured, 176, note. 
 
 , silver-coloured, 189. 
 
 , change in manufacture in 14th cent., 178, 243. 
 
 Glass-painting, process of, 78, 231. 
 
 , the different styles of, 64, 82, 285, note. 
 
 Glasgow cathedral, windows in, 50, 54, 320. 
 
 , compared with those in Lichfield cathedral, 57, 320. 
 
 Gold colours glass red, 226, note. 
 Gouda, painted windows at, 251. 
 Grately church, windows in, 107, note. 
 
 Harmony between the material and mode of working it, 38, 210, 245. 
 Heraldry, friendship and companionship in arms, how commemorated in, 
 
 304, note. 
 Hevckenrode, Abbey of, 312, 321, note. 
 Hospitallers and Templars personified, 166, 275. 
 
 Imitation, Dr. Johnson's remarks on, 128. 
 ''Ironed-out-flat" style of glass-painting, 310 note, 315. 
 
 Jesse windows, 109, 238, 239. 
 
 , arrangement of, 168. 
 
 Jury, report of, on pakited glass in 1851, 156, note. 
 
 Lead-work in mosaic glass-paintings, 193, 
 , a design should have reference to, 54, 249. 
 
INDEX. 361 
 
 Le Mans Cathedral, very ancient glass in, page 78. 
 Limoges, the cradle of glass-painting, 217, 237. 
 
 , Venetian colony at, 217, 237. 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral, the sculpture in, 43. 
 
 Lions and Fleurs-de-lis, border of, to what time it refers, 166. 
 
 Medallion windows, 94, 102, 238, 241. 
 
 , small figures in, objectionable, 94, note, 
 
 MuUions cause a change in glass-painting, 211, 243. 
 
 may be disregarded, 211. 
 
 Munich school of glass-painting, 36. 
 , improved practice of, 320. 
 
 Nettlestcad Church, glass in, compared with that at Gloucester, 58. 
 Nimbus sometimes omitted, 297, note. 
 
 Opaqueness, mode of ascertaining proper degree of, in glass, 180. 
 
 Pagan and Paganism, abuse of the terms, 172, 230. 
 Painted glass, 75, 237. 
 
 , most ancient in England, 71, 78. 
 
 , modern in Arundel Castle, 85, 187. 
 
 Brussels Cathedral, 156. ' 
 
 Chester Cathedral, 97. 
 
 Ely Cathedral, 97, 110 note, 147 note. 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral, 21. 
 
 Norwich Cathedral, 23. 
 
 St. Andrew's, Holborn, 252. 
 
 • St. George's Chapel, Windsor, 252. 
 
 St. Germain I'Auxerrois, Paris, 49. 
 
 Stafford Church, 103. 
 
 St. Vincent de Paul, Paris, 202. 
 
 Westminster Abbey, 98, note ; 100, note. 
 
 Patina, la, 44, 47. 
 
 Pattern-window, 238, 241. 
 
 Pearson, 126. 
 
 Peckett, window at York by, 75, 153, note. 
 
 Perpendicular style of glass-painting, places where examples occur, 83, 86, note. 
 
 Picture-windows, 95, 98, 238. 
 
 Pot-metal, 79, 81. 
 
 Price, 150. 
 
 Quarterly Coat of Arms, early instance of, 302, note. 
 
 Receding pictures in glass-painting, 205, 206. 
 Restoration, mischief of, 308. 
 , judicious, at Bristol, 160. 
 
 of the North Rose, Lincoln, 222. 
 
 of Gloucester east window, 308. 
 
 , estimates for, and cost of, this last, 309, note. 
 
 Reynolds, Sir J., designs by, 85, 125, 155, 187, 251. 
 
 Rouen, glass for Exeter, Westminster, and Merton College, brought from, 171. 
 
 , painted window from, at York, 74. 
 
 2 B 
 
362 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Ruby glass, page 81. 
 
 , the oldest, 71. 
 
 , revived manufacture of, 6G, 171. 
 
 , gold, 226, note. 
 
 , smooth, 228. 
 
 , streaky, 226, 227, 286, note. 
 
 Saddle-bars, a design should have reference to, 240. 
 
 St. Sophia's, Constantinople, 235. 
 
 Sculpture in Lincoln Cathedral, 43. 
 
 Shading, smear, 80. 
 
 , , stippled, 147, 80, note. 
 
 stipple, 80, 100. 
 
 Solyman, Sultan, mosque of, glazing in, 236. 
 
 Stigmata, the, Avhen, and when not, represented, 109, note. 
 
 Suger's glass at St. Denis, 78, 201, 238. 
 
 Tertiarii in religious houses, 270, note. 
 
 Theophilus, Diversarum Artium Schedula, 78, 82 note, 237, 296 note 
 
 Tinfoil behind glass, 189. 
 
 Toga, saints represented in, 220, 242. 
 
 Tracery lights, white glass favourable to, 209. 
 
 Valsecclii, portrait on glass by, 186. 
 
 White glass, use of, 93, 99, 100. 
 
 Yellow stain, 80. 
 
 , earliest example of, 261, note. 
 
 Ornamented circle, with I. H. S., from Thaxted Church, Essex, 1490. 
 
 LONDON : PUIKTKD BY W. CLOWKS AND SONS, STAMFCRD STRKKT, AND CHARING CRCSS. 
 
V-^-bzHoy 
 
GETTY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 
 
 3 3125 01392 0323 
 
 \y 
 
 \%(>1 
 

 m^^ 
 
 ?^2i 
 
 > %^^^sm?> 
 
 ^^- -^3? ? 
 
 
 
 
 ^"% 
 
 >^ V 
 
 
 
 -%>^^^ 
 
 
 
 ^^. 
 
 ^>^ 
 
 
:^^ 
 
 ;5 ^ 
 
 OJ ^^ 
 
 
 cfe 
 
 .'<2>.-^ ^ 
 
 ^2.^ 
 
 ^l^^J^ 
 
 ^^^ ^j^ 
 
 ^-«>i 
 
 
 
 
 
 &^->^ 
 
 ^,^^-^ >> 
 
 ^I^^^ "'~^i^ 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 ^-> 
 
 ^i3^ ^ ^T< ^ 
 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^ <^r:< 
 
 
 -^^^■—^^-"^.-^ 
 
 -^^^"^^ ^^ ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 3^ si^3_:> 
 
 >^ 
 
 3>^>' 
 
 v 
 
 
 WK> ^ ^ ^- --^ 
 
 ^ ---' y--'^'' - 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 >_^ 
 
 •■-/y ^i^i 
 
 
 ^ ^ -:>