pt**4f "'*' > BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE IN TWO VOLUMES VOLUME II CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS C. F. CLAY, MANAGER LONDON : FETTER LANE, E.G. 4 BOMBAY \ CALCUTTA I MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD. MADRAS ) CHICAGO : THE UNI.VERS1TY OF CHICAGO PRESS TOKYO : MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA ' ALL RIGHTS RESERVED sT7 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE by SIR THOMAS GRAHAM JACKSON, BART., R.A. Hon. D.C.L. Oxford, Hon. LL.D. Cambridge Hon. Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford Associ6 de 1'Academie Royale de Belgique Nunquam vera species ab utilitate dividitur. QUINTIL. Or. Inst. vm. 3 SECOND EDITION Cambridge : at the University Press 1920 IN MEMORIAM A. M. J. : .*. '-. ;$.;*% V* >c >'. A * .r *, ^ *" * First Edition 1913 Second Edition 1920 Art Library HA CONTENTS OF VOL. II CHAP. PAGE XVIII German Romanesque i XIX French Romanesque. Aquitaine and Poitou . . 28 XX French Romanesque. Provence 62 XXI French Romanesque. Toulouse 82 XX U French Romanesque. Burgundy 90 XXIII French Romanesque. Auvergne 127 XXIV French Romanesque. Normandy .... 147 XXV French Romanesque. The Isle of France . . . 159 XXVI English Romanesque before the Norman conquest . 173 XXVII English Romanesque after the Norman conquest . 205 XXVIII English Romanesque after the Norman conquest (cont.) 235 XXIX Conclusion ... 257 Chronological tables of architectural examples . . 269 Index 278 CHAPTER XVIII GERMAN ROMANESQUE THE history of Romanesque architecture in Germany charie- begins with Charlemagne. We find no buildings in that "^iss- 5 country older than his time except those which the ance Romans had left behind them. Charlemagne however was a great builder. Eginhardt his secretary and bio- grapher says he repaired the churches throughout his dominions, but he gives no details. A book de aedificiis in the 8th century would have been very interesting, but Eginhardt was no Procopius, nor was Charlemagne a Justinian. Two buildings however, we are modestly told, seem not unworthy of mention, " the Aix-ia- basilica of the most holy mother of God, constructed with wondrous workmanship at Aqiiisgranum, and a bridge over the Rhine at Moguntiacum?- " This bridge at Mainz was only of wood, perhaps of boats, but the basilica at AIX-LA-CHAPELLE was a great work considering its age and situation. It was destined by Charlemagne to be also his tomb- house, and here he was in fact afterwards buried, seated on his throne, imperially robed, and with his sceptre in his hand and a copy of the gospels on his knee, as he was found when the tomb was opened in 1165. The splendour of this church, says Eginhardt, was the ex- pression of his Christian devotion. He adorned it with 1 Eginhardt, Vita Cat oil Magni, cap. xvii. j. A. II. I Aix-la- Chapelle Imitation ofS.Vitale 2 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm gold and silver, and lights, and with doors and screens of solid bronze. Hither he would come to the service morning and evening and even by night as long as his health permitted 1 . The building (Fig. 63) was something of an exotic in the kingdom of the Austrasian Franks in the 8th century, AIX-LA-CHAPrjLLE. t pfan, . Fig. 63. and no one who has seen it and also the church at Ravenna from which it is supposed to have been imitated, can doubt its foreign origin. Eginhardt tells us that Charlemagne imported columns and marbles for the work from Ravenna and Rome 2 , and he is supposed to have stripped and ruined the splendid palace of Theodoric at the former city which has now practically disappeared. But besides materials there can be little doubt he also 1 Eginhardt, Vita Caroli Magni, cap. xxvi. 8 Ad cujus structuram, cum columnas et marmora aliunde habere non posset, Roma atque Ravenna \levehenda curavit Eginhardt, cap. xxvi. Plate LXXXIl AIX-LA-CHAPELLE CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 3 imported from Italy his architect and his principal Aix-ia- Chapelle builders. The resemblance to S. Vitale is very strong, and yet there is sufficient difference to show that the builders were men of originality, able to think for them- selves, not tied to a simple imitation of their model, and there could have been no such men in Austrasia then. Both churches have a dome over an octagon, a surround- The plan ing aisle in two storeys, though a women's gallery was not required by the Latin use, two staircases by which to mount to it at the west end enclosed in circular turrets ; and though at Aix there are no exedrae the arches of the upper gallery (Plate LXXXII) have colonnettes in them recalling those at Ravenna, and they have even some- thing like a pulvino on their capitals. Although the diameter of the dome is less than that at S. Vitale by more than ten feet, still a domed building even of these dimensions would be a considerable undertaking at any time, and it is carried out in a very scientific manner. It will be seen from the plan (Fig. 63) that the area of the supports is by no means excessive, and the vaulting of The con- ... 11 i i struction the aisle is very cleverly managed, so as to escape the awkwardness which would have been caused had the outer wall been octagonal like the inner. Instead of that it has 1 6 sides, so that there is a square bay of simple cross-vaulting in the aisle opposite each side of the octagon, the vault of the intervening triangle being easily managed. This is contrived much better here than at S. Vitale, though there further trouble is caused by the protrusion of the exedrae into the aisle vault. The gallery above is vaulted differently, by barrel vaults on radiating lines turned from arches thrown across from pier to wall, forming square and triangular bays alternately as below. I 2 Aix-la- Chapelle The exterior \ 4 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm Among the capitals some are antique Corinthian, but most of them have been renewed : and of the columns which were carried off by French invaders to Paris not all have come back. The exterior has now a monstrous fluted dome of timber and slate, somewhat grotesque : but probably it had originally a plain pyramidal roof rising from walls carried up as a drum, concealing the dome ; and then the two churches at Aix and Ravenna would have been The metal work LA-CHAPELLE. an. . / 200 -feet. Fig. 6 4 . much alike outside as well as inside. Further evidence of Italian or Italo-Byzantine workmanship is afforded by the mouldings of the cornices, which are rather clumsy versions of classic detail. The old bronze doors of the west and north entrances still hang on their hinges, and the gallery front has its bronze cancelli. The stunted proportion of the lower order and the absence of bases give the impression that the floor level has been raised. CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 5 The original choir was short, like that of S. Vitale, and Aix-ia- m J 353 it was replaced by the present long building (Fig. 64), a veritable lantern of late German Gothic. Its expanded circular end is supposed to represent on the same foundations the tomb-house of Otho III who died in 1 002 and who was supposed by some to have re-built Charlemagne's church. Fergusson believes the truth to be that he built himself a tomb-house where the choir now ends, which the i4th century architect united by the present choir to the 8th century building. There can be little doubt that we have in the Dom of Aix-la-Chapelle the basilica, opere mirabili constructa, of which Eginhardt writes. Some would have it that Eginhardt himself, who is described as " operum regalium exactor" and " variarum artium doctor peritissimus" was the architect of the building. It is more probable that like Julianus Argen- tarius at Ravenna he was the administrator of the expenses. Coeval with Charlemagne's basilica at Aquisgranum, Lorsch or possibly a little earlier, may be the little chapel at LORSCH, near Worms, which is generally supposed to be part of the monastery dedicated in the presence of Charle- magne in 774 (Plate LXXXIII). It was originally a gatehouse two storeys high, with three open arches in front and three behind. The floor has been removed and the three arches of the back built up in order to convert it into a chapel. The altar stands against the central blocked arch under an additional arch on columns and capitals, which is planted on the wall and encloses the original central arch. This inner, additional arch is in a totally different style from the building, and is decorated with zigzags like 6 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm Lorsch Norman work. The capitals are also of a much later date ; certainly not older than the nth or I2th century. The building has a high-pitched roof of slate, but the original pitch was low, as may be seen by the starting of a modillion pediment at one end. The details are of a debased classic type. The lower capitals are imitated rig. 65. from composite (Fig. 65), and have no necking; they are well carved, and carry a stringcourse or cornice at the first floor level decorated with a regular Byzantine pattern. The upper storey has a colonnade of little fluted pilasters with queer Ionic capitals (Fig. 66), supporting what in our Anglo-Saxon work we call straight-sided arches. Three of them are pierced with simple round-headed CH. xvni] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 7 lights, probably insertions. Above at the eaves is a good Lorsch plain modillion cornice (Fig. 67), which once was returned on the end walls and ramped into a pediment, though only the starting already mentioned now remains. The walls between the columns are of red stone chequered with white. It is an extremely curious little building, showing in the execution of the carving a skill and knowledge superior to the local talent of the Germany of those days, and betraying a Byzantine, or Italo-Byzantine hand ; but Betrays the strange design of the upper storey shows no affinity influence with the art of the Exarchate or the East. Rivoira maintains that it is not a Carlovingian building at all, but the funeral chapel of Lewis III (876-882) who Fig. 66. Fig. 67. according to the Chronicon Laureshamense was buried here in the church called " Varia" which he had built 1 . It is impossible however to believe that a building with its long axis north and south, three open arches to the west, and three more to the east that once were open, for they show both inside and out, could have been built for a church. It is recorded that it was consecrated as a chapel in 1053, at which time we may suppose the three eastern arches were closed, the altar placed against the middle one, and the additional arch with its zigzags and Romanesque capitals erected over it for dignity. The 1 Apud Lauresham, in ecclesia quae dicitur Varia, quam ipse hujus rei gratia construxerat. Cited by Rivoira, vol. n. p. 510. Lasteyrie, Arch. Relig. p. 171, thinks the building not older than the fire of 1090. It is remarkable that a capital of the lath century cloister at Elne illustrated by McGibbon (Arckit. of Provence, &c.) is precisely like that in Fig. 65. 8 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm Lorsch adjective varia is applicable to a polychrome structure, but the vanished abbey of Lorsch may have had many buildings of polychrome masonry besides this one. Nymeguen The round church at NYMEGUEN in Brabant, which is illustrated by Fergusson, is obviously a later imitation of Charlemagne's Palatine chapel at Aix, and the interior is closely copied in the trilateral semi-domed apse at Essen 1 . But his building set no general example, and when German German Romanesque began to assume the character of a definite basiiican style we find the basilican type of church accepted for general use. Under Charlemagne's weak successors, and in the distracted state of the Empire in the 9th century, there was little room for the cultivation of the arts. In 888 on the deposition of Charles the Fat France was separated from Germany, which remained under elective kings till the Empire was revived by Otho I in 936, who conquered Italy and restored it to Imperial rule, and established a more stable government. Rise of During the reign of the three Othos Germany saw free cities something like the development of free communes which was going on in Italy. Many cities had become im- portant trading communities, especially those on the great water-ways of the Rhine and other navigable rivers. Cologne, Treves, Mainz, Worms, Speyer, Nuremburg, Ulm, Regensburg and Augsburg were already aspiring to municipal freedom. Those of them which depended on the Empire, began to resist the Bishop or Imperial Vicar who was put over them. Henry V (i 106-1 125) granted them privileges, took away the jurisdiction of Bishops, and made the cities immediately dependent on the Emperor. Those towns on the other hand which were dependent on Dukes and Counts waged incessant wars 1 Illustrated by Rivoira, vol. II. p. 346, who dates it between 1039 and 1056. Plate LXXXlll LORSCH Plate LXXXIV S. COLUMBA COLOGNE CH.XVIII] GERMAN ROMANESQUE with the castles of the nobility. The fall of the House The of Hohenstaufen completed their liberty and they were admitted to a place in the Imperial diet, just as the free mune communes of Italy after the peace of Constance had been recognized as an estate of the Italian kingdom. There was however this difference between the struggle oo of the cities for municipal freedom in Germany and Italy, that while in Italy the struggle was between the cities and the Emperor the free towns in Germany were the most loyal and obedient subjects of the Empire. The Emperor indeed, says Hallam, was their best friend, as the nobility and the prelates were their natural enemies 1 . It is in the great towns on the Rhine which were in The readiest communication with Italy, and rapidly grew into cities 1 ^ important trading communities, that we find the most brilliant examples of early German Romanesque. The great churches of Cologne, Worms, Speyer, and Mainz are inspired by North Italian example. We meet again Lombard with the arcaded galleries round the apse, which we " knew at Bergamo and Como ; with lofty towers (Plate LXXXIV) panelled, and pierced by windows with mid- wall shafts, like those of Milan; and the tall blank arches that break the plainness of the lower walls remind us of Pisa, Lucca, and Toscanella. The period from Charlemagne's attempted revival of architecture till the end of the loth century is almost a blank as far as any existing monuments are concerned. At Gernrode there is a church of 968, partly restored however in the I2th century, which affords the earliest The ^~ instance of the double apse which is one of the apo peculiarities of German architecture. Various explana- pla tions of this feature in German architecture have been 1 v. Hallam, Middle Ages, chap, v.; Bryce, Holy Roman Empire^ chap. v. io GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm The attempted. In conventual churches one choir may apsidai have been used by the monks, and the other by the townspeople, instead of the English division at the choir- screen. Or as the original churches were not orientated but had the altar at the west end, a second choir and altar may have been added at the east when orientation became the rule. This however fails to explain the churches with an apse of the same date at each end. They are to be found at Hildesheim, Worms, Trier, Mainz, Laach, and may have existed once at Speyer, where the west end has been re-built. They are shown on the curious ground plan of a complete Benedictine s. Gail establishment found in the library of S. Gall in Switzer- land, which was sent to Gospertus the abbot who re-built that church between 820 and 830, and may possibly have been drawn by Eginhardt himself 1 . It shows a church with nave and side aisles, 200 ft. long and 80 ft wide with an apse at each end. Below that at the east is a crypt or confessio, and in front of it a chorus cantorum like those at S. Clemente and S. Maria in Cosmedin at Rome. The entrances for the laity were from a parvise or colonnaded court outside the western apse, with a door to the aisle on each side of it. The eastern apse was to be dedicated to S. Peter, the western to S. Paul. Near the western apse, but detached, were to be two round towers, one on each side with an altar on the top of each, one to S. Michael, one to S. Gabriel, to which the ascent was to be by a spiral inclined plane, if the intention of the draughtsman may be so understood. These double apsidai ends of course prevented any- double thing like the facades which are so important a feature of plan 1 As the plan is reproduced by Fergusson and most of the histories of Architecture, I think it unnecessary to have it here. CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE n the great churches in Italy, France and England. The Defects of cathedral of S. Stephen at VIENNA has a fine Roman- " esque front with its " giant doorway," but as a rule the pla entrance to the great German churches is at the side, where there is often a porch of greater or less importance. This involves a considerable sacrifice of effect ; the first view of a fine interior from the west end is not lightly to be parted with. Nor does the exterior of the western apse compensate for the loss of such a fagade as those which delight us at Lucca and Toscanella, S. Gilles and Poitiers, Wells and Exeter. In the interior also the monotony of two similar apsidal ends is disappointing. Lord Leighton, whose remarks on architecture were Lord always valuable, said in one of his Presidential addresses ^mlrks" s to the Royal Academy, "externally the effect of this disposition is monotonous and perplexing, but it is in the interior that it chiefly jars on our sense of artistic propriety, and the jar is made more sensible by the fact that the choirs being built over crypts, are, by an arrange- ment in itself very dignified and impressive, raised to a considerable height above the floor of the nave, from which they are approached either on the sides or in the centre by broad flights of steps. The entrance to these churches is in the majority of cases at the side, and the eye of the spectator, controlled as he enters by no dominant object, is solicited simultaneously and distress- ingly in two diametrically opposite directions each individual group of apse and dome suffers by rivalry with the other 1 ." The typical plan of these double-apsidal churches Double includes a transept at the west as well as at the east end, ^d towers 1 Discourse delivered to the students of the Royal Academy on the distribution of prizes, Dec. 9, 1893, by Sir Frederick Leighton, Bart., P.R.A. 12 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm The German and over the crossing of each of them is an octagonal sbTtowers dome on squinch arches, contained in a tower which is arcaded with an external gallery and has a more or less acutely pointed roof. Right and left of this are two flanking towers, often at the end of the transept so that there are three towers on a line at right angles to the axis of the building at each end of it. In other cases they are given more room by moving the two side towers forward out of line with the central dome-tower. Six towers is the full complement for a Rhenish church of the first Worms Cathedral \ /' ! / r-- \l t ' ^ X x. S4-: M x \ / \ k-V\ s -J / \ SCALE or nrr Fig. 68. rank, and this is the number at Worms, Speyer, Laach and Mainz. All these churches, except Laach which is a little later, date from the first half of the nth century, though they have been altered to some extent in the 1 2th century and afterwards. WORMS is perhaps the most pleasing of the group. It was founded in 1016, but restored and re-dedicated in 1 1 8 1. It is an immense basilican church, with two apses, but only one transept, which is at the eastern end (Fig. 68). The choir is prolonged beyond the crossing and the apse is masked outside by a straight wall between Plate LXXXV WORMS CATHEDRAL. The Western Towers Plate LXXXVI WORMS CATHEDRAL CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 13 two round towers with spires. These towers are Worms panelled with pilaster strips connected at each stage by arcaded cornices. They are set in a little, stage by stage, as they rise, which gives a very good outline. The dome-tower has an arcaded gallery round it, and so has the western dome-tower, which is flanked by two other round towers one of which has been re-built in Gothic times. The apse at this end is also later than the Romanesque part, and not so good. There being no transept at this end the flanking towers are brought close up to the central one, which they seem to support. The effect of this group is very noble (Plate LXXXV). Inside, the nave between the two domed spaces consists of five square bays, cross-vaulted, corresponding to twice that number in the aisle, so that the nave arches are ten on a side (Plate LXXXV I). The piers are all of plain square masonry with only a moulded impost by way of capital. The main piers, corresponding to the divisions of the nave, have attached pilasters and half- columns with cushion capitals running up to take the vaulting. The intermediate piers have a shallow flat pilaster formed by setting back the arch and wall over it, which runs up and carries two blank arches over the round-headed clerestory windows. The vaulting has pointed arches, and is later than the church. But from the plan of the piers and the attached half-columns with their capitals at the proper height to start the transverse rib, and an additional break suitable for a diagonal rib, it seems that vaulting was intended from the first. The gathering in of the dome should be noticed. It The dome begins with something like a spherical pendentive, which changes suddenly into a squinch arch on which the octagonal dome rests. It looks as if the architect had i 4 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm begun a true pendentive but did not know how to finish it. Worms, We must not leave Worms without mention of the synagogue interesting I2th century Jewish synagogue. It is a rectangular building vaulted from two columns on the central line with good capitals of the Corinthian type, and there are some pretty diaper patterns round the entrance doorway. Three hundred Jewish families are still living at Worms, and from the scale and architectural pretensions of this building the colony would seem to have been still more numerous in the i2th century. Speyer The great cathedral of SPEYER was dedicated by Cathedral Bishop Gundecar of Eichstadt (1057-1075), but the upper part was re-built after a fire in 1159. It suffered at the hands of the French in 1689, who expelled the inhabitants, burned the town, and left the church a ruin : only the choir, transept, five arches of the nave, and the narthex escaped, and the upper part of the transept and the cupola of the narthex were destroyed. The French again violated it at the time of the Revolution, and tried to blow it up, but did not succeed. The building was turned into a magazine, and was not restored to use till 1822. The west front with the Imperial Hall, a sort of narthex, dates from 1854-1858. The ancient crypt (Plate LXXXVII) remains as it was built in 1039. It has plain cross-groining with transverse ribs only, carried by cylindrical columns with cushion capitals. The church has the full equipment of six towers, and two transepts, but the western one belongs to the new front of 1854. Originally the nave may have ended other- wise. A special feature is the exterior arcaded gallery which runs along the top of the walls above the clerestory ft, Plate. LX XX VI II MAINZ CATHEDRAL. N.E. view CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 15 windows. The towers are square, and slender, and are set in each case clear of the transept against its eastern side. They are panelled in the Lombard way. The splendid cathedral of MAINZ (Plate LXXXVIII) Mainz was re-built and re-consecrated between 1037 and 1049 and again restored after a fire between 1056 and 1106. The nave was vaulted with pointed arches by Archbishop Conrad, probably after the fire of 1 1 90. Though not so badly treated by the French as Speyer, the cathedral during the Napoleonic wars went through many vicissitudes, and was used at one time as a hay magazine, and at another as a slaughter house. It has two apses, two transepts and six towers, that over the western crossing having been re-constructed, according to the guide books, with cast-iron by M oiler of Darmstadt, the architect who restored the church after its desecration. The domes are octagonal and rest on squinch arches. The description of the nave at Worms will apply very well to that of Mainz (Plate LXXXIX). There are the same square piers without capitals, even plainer here than at Worms ; but the blank arches springing from the pilaster of the intermediate piers are turned below the clerestory instead of above it. This leaves a space between the two arches, where the triforium, if there had been one, would have been, which is decorated by paintings. The vaulting shafts have cushion caps and carry round wall ribs, and though the other ribs are pointed the springers remain of a former construction with round arches. The quadripartite vault of the nave is very domical. There is a crypt here like that at Speyer, with tapered The crypt columns carrying cushion capitals, and the two storeyed chapel of S . Godehart at the north transept is very curious. Mainz Cathedral 16 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm A fine Romanesque doorway at the east end has capitals partly of good Corinthian character, partly of animals ; and the bronze knockers here and on the north door are admirable. They date probably from the i2th century; and built into the walls of the south aisle are some very good pieces of Romanesque sculpture dating apparently from the same period (Fig. 69). Laach Fig. 69. The abbey church of LAACH (Fig. 70), near Nieder- mendig and Andernach, picturesquely placed at the head of a lake and surrounded by wooded hills, dates from the middle of the i2th century having been founded in 1093, but not consecrated till 1 1 56. The church is built chiefly of lava, the product of the volcanic district in which it is situated. It is much smaller than the preceding churches but has the full complement of two apses, two transepts and six towers, and though the design has been much praised, it seems to me overdone with too many features (Plate XC). The west end is crowned with a square tower over the centre of the transept and has two round towers at the ends of it. Pilaster strips run up them, Plate LXXXIX MAINZ CATHEDRAL Plate XC LAACH CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 17 turned into columns in the top storey carrying arches, Laach which being wide become distorted on the circular plan ; when seen in profile they undercut the outline with a very bad effect, making the conical roof seem to overhang disagreeably. The eastern turrets at Mainz offend slightly in the same way. The towers of Laach at the east end are square, and more successful. There is a certain coarseness about the arcaded cornices under the eaves, which are much too big. In the interior some progress has been made towards the Gothic system of vaulting, which in this case forms LAACH Fig. 70. part of the original design. The bays of nave and aisles are equal, instead of there being two in the aisle to one in the nave, so that the bay of vaulting in the nave is oblong, the longer dimension being from north to south. The whole church is cross-vaulted with round arched transverse ribs but no diagonals. The nave piers are square, with half-columns towards nave and aisle, and those towards the nave run up as vaulting shafts with cushion capitals. The great arches are cut square through the wall without any moulding, and spring from a small impost moulding without a capital : there is no triforium, J. A. II. 2 i8 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm Laach but a blank wall space, with a single round-headed clerestory window above, and no stringcourse to divide the storeys. The last bay westwards has a gallery which runs back into the apse, forming an upper storey. The lower one contains the tomb of the founder, and is vaulted from a central column. There is no carving, and the whole interior is as plain as possible, but not without dignity. The severity of the style is relaxed in the pretty little cloister which forms an atrium at the west end (Plate XCI). It has three walks, the ends of those on the north and south side opening by doorways into the nave aisles as in the plan for S. Gall. The western apse protrudes into the cloister-garth. The cloister is vaulted with heavy half-round transverse ribs, and no diagonals, and the walls both outer and inner are pierced with round- arched openings on coupled colonnettes which are tapered and incline a little towards one another like those in the cloister at S. Trophime at Aries. All this is excellent. The capitals are carved in rather a lumpy fashion, the stems of the foliage being worked like strap- work and studded with beads. Cologne The Romanesque churches at COLOGNE differ from those we have been describing in having no apse at the K/ western end ; but though that end was thereby set free for treatment as a faade with a western doorway, no advantage is taken of the opportunity. Three of them, S. Maria in Capitolio, Great S. Martin, and the Apostles church are trilobate, the two transepts being apsidal as well as the choir. S. MARIA (Fig. 71) which was re-built and consecrated in 1047 nas an ambulatory aisle round all three, which has a fine effect inside, but imparts an undeniable clumsiness to the outside (Plate XCI I). The Plate XCII S. MARIA IN CAPITOLIO- COLOGNE CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE it details are very plain, there is no carving, there are Cologne. cushion capitals everywhere ; the columns of the apses are cylindrical, and have stilted Attic bases : the nave piers are plain rectangles with an impost moulding instead of a capital : there is no triforium but a blank wall with round-headed clerestory windows above. The nave has later Gothic vaulting on shafts that have been added and are corbelled out above the nave piers. Over the crossing is a dome, which is not circular but The dome rather a square with the corners rounded off so that the S-MAKIA IN CAHTOUO Fig. 71. pendentives are small ; but otherwise it is a real dome of the Byzantine kind. There is a smaller oblong dome over a narrow bay eastwards before the semi-dome of the eastern apse. The transepts have barrel vaults with transverse ribs, and semi-domes over the apses. The aisles are cross-vaulted with transverse ribs but no diagonals. At the west end is a narthex or porch as wide as the nave alone, to which it opens with a triple arch, and there is a gallery over it with a triple arch of the same kind. 20 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm Cologne. The crypt extends under both choir and transepts. Capitoiio It has cylindrical tapered columns with cushion capitals, the central column under the apse however is a quatrefoil in plan. The vault is cross-groined with flat transverse ribs and no diagonals, the arris of the diagonal groin being pinched up. At Great S. Martin (1172) and SS. Aposteln (1193) the triple apses have no aisles, a manifest improve- ment on S. Maria in Capitoiio. The former of these churches with its magnificent central tower and its galleried apses forms a prominent feature in the river front of the town, and has the finest exterior of anything in Cologne. In the interior there is a triforium with pointed arches above a round arched arcade, and except the barrel vault of the transepts and the semi-dome of the apse, the vaults are Gothic. Andemach The Romanesque churches of Coblentz and Ander- nach were built early in the i3th century. ANDERNACH (Plate XCIII) has four towers, two at each end, and no transepts. It has three apses at the east end for choir and aisles, the central one arcaded inside with niched recesses below a range of large round-headed windows. There is a triforium as large as the arcade below, of two lights under an including arch, divided by rather slender coupled shafts. The nave is four bays long to eight of the aisle, the western bay being occupied by a gallery. The nave piers are square with an impost moulding and s&\ no capital. The eastern towers have pyramidal roofs ; The v/ the western, the^jerman gabled sjDire which is so constant gabled a feature of the style. It is formed by gabling all four spire sides of the tower, and setting a square spire of timber and slate diagonally on the points of the gables instead of directly on the angles of the tower. The spire is completed Plate XCIH AXDERNACH CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 21 by continuing the four planes of the triangular inclined spaces till they meet between gable and gable, making the triangle into a diamond. There is an unique example of such a spire in England, at the Saxon Church of Sompting in Sussex. The fine churches of S. Michael and S. Godehard at mides- HILDESHEIM which date from the middle of the i ith cen- tury, with additions in the i2th, are in some respects more highly finished than the great churches on the Rhine, though they cannot compete with them either in scale or in exterior magnificence. There is more carving in the capitals, though they preserve the cubical form of the cushion type, and there is more variety in the nave arcades which are divided by piers between groups of arches on columns. With the eastern part of STRASSBURG Cathedral, strassbmg which was apparently re-built early in the I3th century, one reaches the last stage of German Romanesque. There is the familiar central tower over the crossing of an eastern transept enclosing a dome on squinches, and at the corners of the choir are two round turrets, but all the arches are pointed, and the turrets are almost reduced to pinnacles. There are evident signs of a coming change, but the Romanesque style lingered long and died hard in Germany, and it was not till the 1 3th century was well advanced that it finally gave way to the foreign style imported from France, which resulted in the cathedral of Cologne. The vast cathedral of TOURNAI, with its five towers, Toumai its Romanesque nave and transept, and its I4th century iri choir, a very lantern of glazed stonework, is one of the most striking in Europe. It lies outside the limits of Germany proper ; but its apsidal transepts with their 22 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm flanking towers attach it to the style of the great Rhenish churches, and if the Romanesque choir were, as no doubt it was, apsidal too, the plan would have been like that of the three trilobate churches of Cologne. The nave on the other hand has more affinity with the churches of Normandy, so that Tournai serves as a link between the Romanesque styles of northern France and Germany. The nave The nave (Fig. 72) was dedicated in 1066, but some of the details are hardly consistent with so early a date. It has the large open-arched triforium of the Norman churches, here quite as large as the arcade below. Both of these storeys are vaulted, and above them is a real triforium under the aisle roof with small plain openings under a colonnaded arcade towards the nave. The nave piers have half-columns on all four sides and between them in reveals are detached octagonal shafts. Each shaft of the group carries its own order in the orthodox style. The capitals are richly carved, those in the lower arcade of a convex form, with interlacing foliage, grotesque animals, knots and twists of various kinds, much elaborated and highly finished. Those of the upper galleries have the concave outline and angle volutes of a more advanced kind than one would expect from so early a date. There are however some like them at the contemporary churches of William the Conqueror at Caen. Thetran- The apsidal transepts are later than the nave and were built about 1146. They have a diameter of 32 ft. and are surrounded by ambulatory aisles parted from them by cylindrical columns 2' n" in diameter carrying round arches of two orders. The semi-dome is supported by converging ribs from the piers between the windows. These transepts are as fine as anything I know in Romanesque architecture. CH. xvni] GERMAN ROMANESQUE TOCJRNALCOT. Fig. 72. 24 Character of German Roman- esque GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm The great early German churches, especially those on the Rhine, have a sort of sublimity about them that is all their own ; and though they bear marks of their Lombard parentage they have an individuality which places them in a class by themselves. They are generally on a^graad. scale, the naves with a span of over 30 ft, and they are veryjpfty, unlike many early buildings which are low and stunted. Externally they have considerable richnessjof design, especially when there is the little colonnaded gallery which with its black intervals and well-defined arcades and colonnettes always has a brilliant effect. - F Fig. 73- Their sky line, broken by the jiumerous towers, gathered together in groups, has a picturesque effect unlike any- thing to be found in contemporary works in Italy, where even to a later date the exterior, except in certain well- known instances, was less thought of than the interior. At the same time even in the most successful efforts one cannot but feel the presence of a certain clumsiness and want of grace both in general design and in detail which one does not find in the rudest work of the early French and Italian schools. German Romanesque is an honest, sturdy style, which is strong, virile and positive though wanting in the finer graces CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 25 Internally the German churches are plain and severe Severity of beyond almost any buildings of the time in other Roman" countries. Cushion capitals and plain impost mouldings esque take the place of carved capitals, and square piers of masonry that of cylindrical or clustered columns. The absence of triforium also increases the bare effect of the walls. No doubt in old days they were painted all over, and would then have had plenty of colour, but in their present bald and bare condition they teach the useful lesson that a building may be made impressive and architectural without ornament. In the later German work carving comes to the aid of the designer. There are some very beautiful and delicate imposts to the door of the i3th century church at ANDERNACH (Fig. 73), richly carved Byzantinesque borders Carving of surround the doorway at BOPPART (Fig. 74), and a frieze of scroll-work runs along the walls over the nave arcades of S. Andrew at Cologne, mingled with other carving which approaches the standard of French work. It is a curious jumble of archaic and progressive art, in which the architecture remains stubbornly Romanesque, but admits decorative features of the new style which had been developed across the frontier in France, and in England. In the earlier churches the aisles were vaulted, but a vaulting vault over the nave, though perhaps intended, was not buttresses achieved till a later date. They are all vaulted now, and it is remarkable that they stand perfectly well without flying buttresses. The vault of the nave at Laach indeed is tied in with iron from side to side, but I have noticed no sign of weakness elsewhere. France when flying buttresses came into fashion ran riot, and could not make too much of them ; and Cologne Cathedral, imitating and 26 GERMAN ROMANESQUE [CH. xvm Flying overdoing the imitation, is smothered in flying buttresses beyond all reasonable limit. In England and Italy they Fig. 74- were never fashionable, and when there were any they were if possible hidden under the aisle roofs as they are CH. xvm] GERMAN ROMANESQUE 27 at Winchester. But many of our great vaulted churches Flying have none. Gloucester has but two on the south side of the nave and they are hidden under the aisle roof : Worcester has some placed irregularly where the con- struction seems to need support ; and there are none at all at Tewkesbury. It is doubtful whether we should have admired the Mural great German churches in their original paint as much as F we do now. Most of those in Cologne have been painted lately or are being painted now, and the result is detestable. Moreover the windows have been filled with coloured glass, thus mixing up two inconsistent modes of decoration. Colour by reflexion in mural painting is killed by the overpowering brilliancy of colour transmitted through stained glass. As a rule you cannot even see it. None of the Byzantine churches which have the finest mosaics in Constantinople, Salonica, Venice, Ravenna, or inconsis- if I remember in Rome, have any but clear glass in the windows, and consequently the mosaics are well seen glass and hold their own. Decoration by mural painting or mosaic, and decoration by painted glass, are two perfectly incompatible systems, and the artist must choose between them. To grasp at both and try and use them together is an inartistic blunder. CHAPTER XIX FRANCE IN no province of the Roman Empire was Latin culture more firmly rooted, and in none did it show more Roman vigorous growth than in Gaul, especially in the south, in Gaul and south-western parts. The schools of Treves, Lyons, Aries,- and the Auvergne, and still more those of Toulouse, Narbonne, and Bordeaux were pre-eminent in the empire during the 5th century and are described as the last strongholds of Roman learning in the west of Europe 1 . The native language had given place to that of Italy, and the Latin of Bordeaux was said to have been the purest in Gaul. Provence is still full of splendid remains is of Roman architecture, and Italy itself cannot show anything superior to the temples at Nlmes and Vienne, the amphitheatres at Nlmes and Aries, the great theatre at Orange, and the stupendous aqueduct of the Pont du Gard which dwarfs those of the Campagna. The poet Ausonius at Bordeaux and Sidonius Apollinaris at Clermont in the 4th and 5th centuries lived in the midst of a cultivated literary society, of which their writings Effect give a lively picture. The establishment of the Visi- barbarian gothic kingdom, and the settlements of Frank and Burgundian barbarians do not seem at that time to have interrupted the life of the great Roman nobles seriously, 1 Dill, p. 407, Guizot Lect ments CH. xix] FRANCE 29 for we find them still retaining their possessions and living on good terms with the new comers. Sidonius has left an amiable portrait of the Gothic King Theodoric II, with whom he dined and diced. The remains of early Christian art in this region Gaiio- consist mainly if not entirely in the sarcophagi, of which S aroo- n there are splendid specimens in the museum at Aries, phagi dating probably from the time of Constantine. They have been brought thither from the famous sepulchral avenue of Aliscamps, Elysii campi, where one may still walk as Dante did between rows of stone coffins capable of containing heresiarchs. In the delicacy and refinement of the sculpture that adorns them we may trace the effect of Greek tradition, for Aries was an appanage in old times of the Phocaean colony at Marseilles, and the superiority of the art here to that at the neighbouring city of Nimes is remarkable. In one sarcophagus, divided into seven compartments by trees which form a beautiful arboreal canopy, are represented six miracles of our Lord, the central panel being occupied by an orante, or female figure with hands extended in the attitude of prayer (Plate XCIV). The figure of Christ is repeated in each panel, a youthful beardless Roman, without nimbus, evidently a conventional representation like the Pastor bonus at Ravenna, such as preceded the time when that divine portraiture was attempted which became stereotyped in later religious art. Other sarcophagi have the compartment divided by classic columns or pilasters carrying arches, in one in- stance round and straight-sided alternately, sometimes with a shell-head, and with figures in all cases of the Roman type, well executed. If it is safe to assume that these fine sarcophagi which 30 FRANCE [CH. xix once furnished the Aliscamps at Aries were carved in provincial Gaul, they show a very flourishing state of art there in the 4th century, at least equal to that of Italy. But of course it is possible that the finer sort may have been brought from Rome, and there is certainly a close resemblance between one of those in the museum at Aries and a sarcophagus in the Lateran Museum. France For the architecture of the fourth and three following ancfjth centuries we must trust to description only, for nothing centuries o f j t remams< At the beginning of that period we find the great nobles of Auvergne and Aquitaine living on their estates in lordly villas with large retinues and house- holds of slaves. Sidonius describes his country house in Auvergne much as Pliny 1 describes his Tusculanum to his friend Apollinaris. Sidonius speaks of dining rooms for winter and for summer, baths with domed roofs on graceful columns, apartments for the ladies, and spinning rooms for the maids, saloons and verandahs. Primitive Nor was church architecture behindhand. The at'TourJ church built by Bishop Namatius in the 5th century at ciermont Clermont-Ferrand is described by Gregory of Tours as measuring 150 ft. by 60, and 50 ft. in height to the roof. It had side aisles, was cruciform and apsidal, with 42 windows, 70 columns and 8 doors. The walls were adorned with mosaic of various kinds of marble 2 . The odour of sanctity was patent to the senses, for the church exhaled " the sweetest scent as of aromas." On a still larger scale was the famous basilica of S. Martin built by Bishop Perpetuus in 472 at Tours, which Gregory the historian and bishop himself re-built after a conflagration. 1 PI in. Ep. v. 6. Sid. Apoll. Ep. II. ii. a Parietes ad altarium opere sarsurio ex multo marmorum genere exornatos habet. Greg. Turon. x. 16. He gives a long list of churches built at this time by Bishop Perpetuus and others. sarsurius = musivum opus. Ducange. CH. xix] FRANCE 3! It was 10 ft. longer than that at Clermont, though not Church ot , r . , , . , . . S. Martin quite so lotty ; it had 52 windows, 120 columns, and at Tours 8 doors, and seems to have been preceded by an atrium or cloistered forecourt. Sidonius celebrates this church in an ode of which he sends a copy to Lucontius, ending with a pun on the name of the founder, "Perpetuo durent culmina Perpetui 1 ." He writes to his friend Hesperius 2 an account of the Primitive dedication of a church at Lyons built by Papa Patiens, at 'Lyons pope or bishop of that city, who like himself was a great Gallo-Roman noble, and had used his wealth liberally to help the poor in time of distress. On the walls of the church Sidonius at the bishop's request had inscribed what he calls a tumultuarium carmen, of which he sends Hesperius a copy. The church was lofty, and was orientated : the gilded ceiling vied with the sunshine ; and though the description is very obscure we can make out that it was lined and paved with various coloured marbles, that the aisles were divided by columns of Aquitanian marble and that the glass of the windows shed a greenish light on the interior. The concluding lines seem to suggest an atrium surrounded by a forest of pillars*. This church at Lyons, of which unhappily no traces remain, probably preceded Justinian's buildings at Con- stantinople by some 50 years, and was very little later than those of Galla Placidia at Ravenna. Beyond these scanty details and the enumeration of columns, windows 1 Sid. Apoll. Ep. IV. xviii. 2 Sid. Apoll. Ep. II. x. 3 ... remotiora Claudunt atria porticus secundae ; Et campum medium procul locatas Vestit saxea silva per columnas. 32 FRANCE [CH. xix and doors, information just enough to tantalize us, we have nothing to tell us what the churches of Perpetuus and his contemporaries were like ; nothing to show how nearly they approached the standard of Ravenna, or fell short of it. Decay of The letters of Sidonius are the swan-song of Roman Roman culture in Gaul. The polite society that still existed in culture t j ie j. tn cen t ur y was gradually submerged beneath the flowing tide of barbarism. " Roman society was destroyed in Gaul," says M. Guizot, "not as a valley is ravaged by a torrent, but as the most solid body is disorganized by the continual infiltration of a foreign substance 1 ." The arts shared the fate of the general culture and sank with it. In the next century no such church as that of Pope Patiens could have been built at Lyons. Dearth of Viollet-le-Duc a remarks that we possess only very church^ vague ideas of the primitive churches on the soil of tecture France, and that it is only from the loth century down- wards that we can form a passably exact conception of what they were like. In each province of France they differed considerably. And when we do meetwith anything like a continuous series of examples, we find it impossible to treat of French architecture as a whole. At first Latin influence was paramount, but it affected the France architecture of the several provinces in very different ways. During the whole period of Romanesque Art, and indeed for much longer, France was not an united country, but a group of independent, or semi-independent states. Nor was the population homogeneous. In the north and east, which lay more open to colonization by Teutonic invaders, Goths, Franks, Burgundians and 1 Guizot, Civilization in France, Lect. vui. 2 Viollet-le-Duc, Diet. Rais. vol. v. p. 162. CH. xix] FRANCE 33 Normans, all German or Scandinavian tribes, the people Racial had a stronger infusion of German blood than those in the south, where, though the Goths had overrun the country and reigned in Toulouse, the old Gallo-Roman stock survived in greater purity, as it probably does to this day. "The south of Gaul," says M. Guizot, "was essentially Roman, the north essentially Germanic." In the south moreover there still remained important muni- cipalities of Greek or Roman origin, preserving traditions unknown or obliterated in the north. Consequently architecture fell into very different forms in Aquitaine, in Auvergne, in the Isle of France, in Burgundy, in Normandy and in Provence, and the school of each province has to be studied by itself. The Byzantine plan, introduced at Aix-la-Chapelle Byzantine by Charlemagne, did not establish itself in France. The doptedjn basilican type was the favourite, and prevailed even in the France churches of Aquitaine which borrowed the Byzantine dome. One curious instance however of Byzantine influence at Germigny an early date is afforded by the church of GERMIGNY DES PRES (Loiret), which dates from the beginning of the gth century. It was built avowedly in imitation of Charle- magne's Capella Palatinaat Aix-la-Chapelle, by Theodulph, bishop of Orleans, and like its prototype in Austrasia, to which however, as Viollet-le- Due points out, its resemblance is very slight, it is an exotic on Neustrian soil. The church was enlarged in 1067 by the addition of a nave which destroyed the west side of the original building. Theodulph's plan was that of a Greek cross inscribed within a square, with a drum cupola on four isolated columns, and the four arms of the cross are raised above the small squares that fill the angles between the arms of the cross, all exactly as in the smaller churches at Constantinople such as J. A. II. , 34 FRANCE [CH. XIX Germigny des Pres The school of Aquitaine S. Front, Perigueux The re- semblance toS. Mark's S. Theodore and the Pantocrator. Here however the four arms end in apses, which are in plan horse-shoes, more than semi-circular and some of the interior arches are also of that shape. Further traces of Byzantine or Italo- Byzantine influence are afforded by the mosaics on a gold ground of which there are remains in the apse, and by the stucco modelling round some of the windows, of which Viollet-le-Duc gives an illustration. The mosaic he says is unique on French soil 1 . AQUITAINE The territory of the Dukes of Aquitaine in the western and west-central parts of France, included Poitou, the Limousin, most of Guienne, the Angoumois, and latterly Gascony. It was in this district that the influence of Byzantine art was most strongly felt, as is shown by the numerous domed churches to be found there, of which the most remarkable though not the earliest instance is the well-known church of S. FRONT at PERIGUEUX. It consists of two parts, of different dates. At the west end there remains part of a basilican church with nave and aisles, which probably finished eastward with three apses. It had transepts which still exist as detached buildings, the original crossing between them and the eastern parts having been destroyed to make way for the second church 2 (Fig. 75). This later building is a five domed cruciform building, so closely modelled on the plan of S. Mark's at Venice that there can be no doubt the architect had seen and measured the Italian church, and did his best to 1 Diet. Rais. I. 38, vili. 472. This church is illustrated by Rivoira, Origini, etc. vol. I. p. 217 220. I have not seen it myself. 2 Mr Phene" Spiers gives a conjectural restoration of the plan of the Latin church. See his article on S. Front in Architecture East and West, Batsford, 1905. ANCIEN] 1 WORK PRIOR TO "1047. NEW BUtUMNC AFTER FIRE OF 1120. DATE UNKflCYiN, Fig. 75. PLAN OF S. FRONT, PERIGUEUX (Spiers) G. Cloister. H. The five domed church of which the apse was taken down in the I4th century. A, B. Confessionals. E. Nave of old church. F. Porch of old church. 32 36 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix s. Front, reproduce it on French soil. Not only in plan but in dimensions the two correspond very nearly, and De Verneilh has observed that the differences of measure- ment are practically such as would arise from the difference between the Italian and French foot. There are certain variations in the construction of the domes and penden- tives which seem to show that the architect of S. Front was not a Greek himself though he worked on a Greek model. The domes are not hemispheres but are raised to a point, and the pendentives have a curious winding surface instead of the Byzantine spherical form, and are for the most part built with horizontal beds, instead of with beds radiating from the centre and normal to the curve 1 . The great arches that carry the dome, moreover, are slightly pointed. But in the four great piers at the crossing, with the passages through them at two levels, and in the great arches that spring from them there is a manifest imitation of the construction at Venice (Plate XCV). But as Mr Spiers observes though the architect reproduced the plan of S. Mark's he constructed his domes in the French manner which had been practised for a century before 2 . History of The history of the church is this. Bishop Froterius (976-991) began the earlier, the Latin, church which was consecrated in 1047. This it is recorded was covered with wood, except the aisles, which seem to have had barrel vaults placed with their axis at right angles to the nave. 1 Mr Spiers says that the pendentives are struck from the intrados or soffit of the arch, not as usual from the extrados. Consequently the arch forms part of the pendentive, and as it rises the voussoirs incline forwards, East and West, p. 181. This is characteristic of the earlier French domes as well as of S. Front. But it is not an original method there for the dome of S. Sophia is struck from the intrados of the arches. The Byzantine pendentives also are often, perhaps generally, formed with horizontal courses. z>. Van Millingan on Churches of Constantinople, pp. 23-24. * East and West, p. 193. Plate XCV S. FRONT PERIGUEUX CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 37 In 1 1 20 this church was consumed by a terrible fire s. Front, which even melted the bells in the campanile, the aisles alone escaping, thanks to their stone roofs 1 . It was in consequence of this disaster that the re-building of the church in its present form was begun ; the older church at the western end was partly retained, and in the new part the opportunity was taken of building something much grander, something that might be compared to the great church on the lagoons of which the fame had reached the west (Fig. 51, vol. i. p. 231). It is well known that the south and south-westof France Trading had during the early Middle Ages commercial relations with with the the Byzantine empire, and especially with Venice where e alone in Italy the traditions of Byzantine art lingered, and these countries were then the great mercantile centres of Europe. A colony of Venetian merchants was planted at Venetians Limoges about 988-9 : their goods were brought to Aigues- mortes on the Gulf of Lyons, whence by mules and wagons they were conveyed to Limoges, and forwarded to the north of France, and from Rochelle to the British Isles. The Venetians had a bourse at Limoges, and their memory was preserved in the names of streets and gates even after they themselves had disappeared 2 . It cannot be a mere coincidence that it was along this The dome line of commerce with the East that we find a school of to France architecture in France which deliberately made the dome' a principle in church architecture : though S. Front alone has adopted the plan of a Byzantine church as well as the domical covering. 1 Hoc tempore burgus Sancti Frontonis et monasterium cum suis orna- mentis repentino incendio, peccatis id promerentibus, conflagravit, atque signa in clocario igne soluta sunt erat tune temporis monasterium ligneis tabulis coopertum. Gallia Christiana, vol. II. 2 De Verneilh mentions Rue des Venetiens, Porte de Venise, Eperon de Venise, at Limoges, and says that the ruins of the Venetian houses were to be seen as late as 1638. I? Architecture Byzantine en France. Peculiarity of French domes 38 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix The supposition that the architects and their assistants were Frenchmen and not Italians or Greeks is confirmed by the character of the carving at Perigueux which is much more Romanesque than Byzantine, while that at Venice if not imported from Constantinople was certainly cut by Greek chisels. It is confirmed also by the peculiar use made of the domes in other churches of this district, where they are Fig. 76. treated rather as mere vaults, often repeated several times in a row, instead of forming a central dominant feature like the single domes of Salonica and Constanti- nople round which the church was squarely grouped ; - nor are they raised on drums or pierced with windows as in the later Byzantine examples, but are often like other vaults covered with wooden roofs, making no show CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 39 externally. At Souillac, Le Puy, and Angouleme a single s. Front, i 11-1 Perigueux cupola emerges as a lantern above the crossing ; the rest are concealed by the roof. At Solignac, Cognac, and Fontevrault the domes are all hidden, and the most striking feature of a Byzantine exterior disappears. S. Front however is an exception in this respect, for the domes are treated very architecturally on the outside, constructed of ashlar and crowned with finials 1 (Fig. 76). As Justinian determined when re-building S. Sophia after the fire to have nothing combustible about it, so the builders of S. Front excluded from the construction anything that would burn, and the whole church is roofed in solid stone. At the west end, over the Latin church, is a great tower, dating from the time of the re-building in the 1 2th century, of which the ornament shows even less Byzantine feeling than that of the rest of the work. The cathedral of CAHORS is a few years older than Cathedral S. Front, having been consecrated in 1119, the year before the great fire at Perigueux. It is an aisleless church, consisting of two domes with a diameter of about 60 feet, and an eastern part much altered in the i3th or I4th cen- tury (Fig. 77). The domes have regular pendentives and the arches that carry them are slightly pointed. The lateral arches are shallow barrel vaults, carried on piers that project from the side walls to receive them, and sub- arches carry a narrow gallery in front of the windows and through the piers. Painted decoration has been discovered in one of the domes, in which the figures are arranged in the Byzantine manner, and painted ribs converge as at 1 De Verneilh shows a pine-cone finial. The pinnacles now crowded on the exterior are due to M. Abadie, by whom the church has been almost re-built and a good deal altered in design. The angles of the arms of the cross were originally finished with pyramids, of which De Verneilh gives illustrations. Abbey of Solignac 40 TRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix S. Sophia on the crown of the dome. The domes are shown externally, but are covered with timber and slate. The church of SOLIGNAC near Limoges (Haute Vienne) on the contrary has three domes on pendentives that have CAHORS (from. BtVemeCUi) ANOOULEAJE Fig. 77- always been hidden by the roof. They rest on pointed arches. The apse is round inside and polygonal out, and has chapels opening from it without an ambulatory. The central one is polygonal outside and round inside CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 41 like the parent apse : the rest including two on the transepts are semi-circular inside and out. The side thrust of the domes is taken as at Cahors by deep side arches with passages through the piers in the same way, on the top of an arcaded set-off (Fig. 78). The cathedral of ANGOULEME (Fi. 77) was built by Angou- / l&neand Bishop Gerard who occupied the see from 1101-1136. Fonte- vrault Fig. 78. This church and that of the abbey of Fontevrault, which resembles it so closely in design and dimension that De Verneilh 1 conceives it must have been deliberately copied from it, are aisleless cruciform churches covered with a series of domes on pendentives resting on very slightly pointed arches. At Fontevrault the pendentives remain but the domes have been destroyed. 1 De Verneilh, p. 276. 42 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix Angou- The transepts and choir at Angoulme are covered with barrel vaults. At each end of the transept was originally a lofty tower ; that on the south has been destroyed and that on the north re-built. It opens by a lofty arch to the transept, and the interior effect thus produced is superb. The central dome over the crossing is raised on a drum as a lantern. There is a high wall- arcade as at Solignac and Cahors, with two round-headed windows in each bay, and chapels project directly from the great apse without an ambulatory. There are many other examples of true cupolas on Perigueux pendentives in Aquitaine. In PERIGUEUX itself the old cathedral i cathedral of S. ETIENNE which was dedicated in 1047 on the same day as the Latin church of S. Front still preserves two of the three domes it once possessed, and De Verneilh reckons that of some thirty domed churches that once existed in the province of Perigord at least s. jumen fifteen are still standing 1 . The fine church of S. JUNIEN (Plate XCVI) near Limoges has a true dome on penden- s. Leonard tives under the western of its two towers. That of S. LEONARD has the same over both transepts, and the lantern tower over the crossing is carried by true pendentives. But even when we lose the true construction of the V dome on pendentives which comes from Byzantine in- fluence we find the domical idea in various fashions still Angers affecting the design. The cathedral of ANGERS like An- goulme has a single nave without aisles, which is vaulted in large square bays, and though the vaults are constructed with the Gothic ribs and panels, they are raised so high in the middle as almost to have the effect of domes. The s. miaire, same thing happens at the curious church of S. HILAIRE at POITIERS (Plate XCVI I) which was re-built after a fire and consecrated in 1059. At first it seems to have 1 De Verneilh, p. 276 Plate XCVI S. JUNIEN Plate XCVII S. HILAIRE POITIERS CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 43 been roofed with wood, and when in 1 1 30 it was de- s. Hikire termined to vault the nave the span was reduced to more practicable dimensions by building an interior arcade on each side which was connected with the older side walls by flying arches and small cross vaults. But the nave was covered with polygonal quasi-domes, irregular octagons, springing not from real pendentives but from "tromps" or squinch-arches thrown across the angles, like those we have seen above in the churches of Syria. These of course are in no sense of the word real domes, but so far as they go they are imitations of the true domes of Pe'rigueux and Cahors. LE PUY-EN-VELAV does not strictly belong to Aquitaine Le p uy - so much as to Auvergne, but there was a strong connexion between the two districts, and the covering of the great cathedral there affords another instance of the influence of the domical idea. This church was built in three instal- ments. The earliest part is the choir with the transepts, and two bays of the nave, which date possibly from the loth or early part of the nth century, but have been much altered in the i2th. The transepts are barrel vaulted and the nave was originally covered in the same manner. The next two bays were added in the i2th century, and have pointed arches instead of semi-circular. This brought the faade to the verge of a sharp descent in the rock, and indeed some way beyond, for the entrance doors were in a storey below the church floor, and the approach to the church was by an ascending flight of steps from the central door, rising through a circular aperture in the floor in the middle of the nave. As an old monkish chronicler has it "one entered the church of Notre Dame by the nostril, and left it by the ears," that is by the side doors of the transepts. The central door of this, the 44 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix Le Puy- original facade, has porphyry columns in the jambs, the spoils of some ancient fabric. The original doors of cedar remain, though they are closed, the approaches to church and cloister being now managed differently. They are remarkable works of the time, carved with gospel subjects bearing traces of colour and gilding and explained by rhyming Leonine hexameters. The artist has carved his name on the upright moulding that covers the meeting styles : GAVSFREDVS ME FECIT PETRO SEDENTE. There was a bishop Peter 1159-1191. The last two bays and the west front were completed in 1 1 80, and are advanced boldly down the steep hill- side, giving the fa9ade a splendid elevation. A long flight of steps is carried upwards under them which has a very dignified effect. At the time of this last addition we must suppose that the barrel vaults of the older part of the nave were replaced by the present domical con- structions. The nave (Plate XCVIII) is covered with a suc- cession of octagonal quasi-domes constructed rather in the V fashion of S. Hilaire, on squinch arches. On the east and west sides they spring from walls brought up squarely to the plate level, on arches across the nave a very singular feature. The squinches being raised above the crown of the arch instead of being below it, there is an up- right stage a sort of drum on which the dome is raised. These domes are concealed under a common roof, their side walls being pierced with windows to form a clerestory, except that over the crossing, which is carried up to form a lantern in a kind of central tower. This however has been entirely re-constructed in the worst taste as regards the interior, and differs widely from the original design. In 1843 the repair and restoration of the church was /'lute XCVIII LE I'UY CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 45 entrusted to M. Mallay, who re-built the south transept, Le Puy- which seems to have been partly destroyed previously, repaired the north transept, re-constructed the central cupola with its piers and the two domes of the nave next to it, and re-built the lower part of the two western bays and the whole of the west front on new foundations, this part of the building having settled and parted from the older part eastward of it. The cloister also was ex- tensively restored by him. The restoration has been much blamed, and certainly there is a good deal of new work that might have been avoided, but he seems entitled to the credit of having saved the building from ruin 1 . No excuse however can be found for M. Mimet, who destroyed the original apse of the choir in 1865, and substituted the present incongruous square chamber. The old semi-circular apse was enclosed in a square exterior construction and did not show outside. I find no explanation of the disappearance of the 1 5th century apse of the south choir aisle which I saw and sketched in 1864 (v. Plate CXXIII). The small church at POLIGNAC a few miles from Poiignac Le Puy has a polygonal quasi-dome on squinches carried by pointed arches, and an apse with a stone semi-dome of a pointed form. Other examples of octagonal domes on squinches in the west of France occur at Notre Dame, Poitiers, and the two churches at Chauvigny. But the most curious outcome of the tradition which inspired the use of this kind of covering is the strange 1 Manuscrit de F architect* Mallay, ed. N. Thiollier, 1904. His editor says "nous ne pourrons pas Fabsoudre de toutes les critiques dont il a &. 1'objet : mais nous ferons des maintenant remarquer que les reconstructions qu'il a faites, e"taient gene"ralement rendues ne'cessaires par l'e"tat pre*caire dans lequel se trouvait l'e"difice. Cela resulte clairement d'un rapport de Viollet- le-Duc envoye k Puy k l'e"poque des travaux," etc 4 6 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix Loches church of LOCHES in Touraine, which really consists of nothing but four steeples in a row (Plate XCIX), with the addition of an apse at one end and a porch at the other. The two extreme steeples are carried up like ordinary campaniles, but the other two between them are vast octagonal pyramids, hollow, without windows, dim and mysterious as one looks up from below into their dark cavernous recesses. Not real All these last mentioned structures are not real domes, domes having nothing in common with the construction of the Byzantine cupola on pendentives, or with the domes of Pe>igueux, Cahors, Solignac and Angouleme. In fact the pyramids at Loches according to M. Viollet-le-Duc are built with horizontal beds like the Gothic spire, and consequently have no thrust, being formed by a system of corbelling. But all the same there can be little doubt that they were inspired by Byzantine tradition, for they belong to that side of France in which alone the true dome is found, and in which its appearance can be traced to the commercial connexion which we know existed between those provinces and Venice and the East. Sculpture Sculpture does not play so large a part in the churches taine qul ^ Aquitaine as in those of Provence or Burgundy. The capitals at S. Front are remotely derived from Corinthian as is the case in all early work, but though the church is built on Byzantine lines the carving is singularly free from Greek feeling and is based more on Roman types. Of figure sculpture in this province there is compara- Poitiers, lively little during the Romanesque period. At Poitiers (Plate C) the fagade of the church of Notre Dame has figure sculpture in the niches and spandrels, and the front of Angouleme is still more elaborately covered with figure Plate XCIX LOCHES CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 47 carving, though not in my judgment so happily. The cathedral of Cahors has some admirable sculpture in the north door. At CIVRAY the church has a remarkable Fig. 79. ~Poikiers Fig. 80. fa$ade (Plate CI) with some very beautiful carving, and though a good many of the figures seem not to be in their proper place, and others are sadly mutilated, on the 48 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix whole this is one of the most charming facades in western Romanesque. But the west fronts of most of the churches that have been mentioned are singularly plain and un- adorned, and in general the sculpture in this district is confined chiefly to the capitals. These, especially in the apses, are very commonly carved with figures, and gospel subjects, or with fanciful Fig. 8 1. animals, while in the naves they are treated more simply with volutes and leaves descended remotely from the Corinthian type, and sometimes of great excellence. Fig. 79 shows one from the fagade of Angouleme, and Fig. 80 another from Poitiers. The shrine of S. Junien in the church at the town that bears his name has an interesting series of niches and figures (Fig. 81). Plate Cl CIVRAV r S. SAVIN CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 49 In many of the capitals of these churches the influence of Byzantine ornament is obvious, derived no doubt from the woven fabrics, and other works of Byzantine art which found their way along the line of Venetian and Eastern commerce. Mixed with this however we find Appear- in the 1 2th century a new influence at work, and the grotesque makes its appearance. This element points to a northern rather than a southern origin, and probably resulted from intercourse with the Normans, Danes, and English. For grotesque is the fun of the north rather than of the south. The interlacing patterns of scrolls and animals biting and intertwining with one another which play so large a part in the Saxon manuscripts are repeated in the carving of wooden churches of Scandinavia, and on the crosses and monuments of the northern settlers in Britain and the north of France. And here in Poitou and Aquitaine this style of ornamentation seems to have encountered the other which came from the east. At Souillac, one of the domed churches belonging to the group which we have been considering, there is a column consisting entirely of birds and beasts and little men, interlaced and gnawing and clawing one another 1 , which bespeaks an artistic motive far removed from the sweet severity of Byzantine ornament. Gradually the Byzan- Decline of tine element weakened as French architecture became more national and independent, but it is singular that a capital at Le Puy, which Viollet-le-Duc illustrates 2 as having at last freed itself from Byzantine influence, should be almost identical in construction and design with one in the narthex of the church of the Chora built at Constantinople by the Comneni at the end of the nth century. 1 See illustration, V.-le-Duc, vin. p. 196. * Ibid. vui. p. 199. J. A. II. 4 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix Aisie-iess It remains to notice a. few other peculiarities of the churches R omanes q ue o f western France. Of the 14 churches illustrated in De Verneilh's book not one has aisles. Several of them, like Angouleme, Fontevrault, Souillac, and of later date Angers, are cruciform in plan, but all have simple naves of wide span without side aisles. Eastwards, eight of the fourteen finish with an apse, from which three or more semi-circular chapels project, Fontevrault alone having an ambulatory aisle with chapels starting from it. Five of the number have square ends, including S. Etienne, the old cathedral of Perigueux ; and it may be observed that the square end is also found after the Romanesque period in the 1 3th century cathedral of Poitiers. Con- In all these churches with true domes on pendentives ^/French the resistance to the thrust of the cupola is afforded by deep interior buttresses, between which wide arches are turned, the exterior wall of the church being retired to the outside of the buttress piers. This is in fact the Byzantine principle of construction in a modified form. At S. Sophia in Constantinople and at S. Mark's in Venice and S. Front in Perigueux the domes are sustained by arches set four-square having a wide soffit, amounting to barrel vaults. The same principle is applied in these churches of Aquitaine, as for instance at Cahors and Solignac (v. sup. Figs. 77, 78), where the buttresses are brought so far inwards that the lateral arches between them amount to narrow barrel vaults sufficient to stay the dome. A shallow pilaster expresses the buttress on the outside of the building. The same construction is adopted at the other domed single-aisled churches throughout the province, and it is not till one comes to the cathedral of Angers in post- Romanesque times, where CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 51 the domical construction is more apparent than real, and has really been superseded by a form of cross vaulting, that the interior buttresses disappear, and exterior buttresses take their place. It has been hotly debated whether this singular Byzantine development of a domical style of architecture in Aqui- taine and especially in Perigord, so far from the scene of its original appearance, and without any connecting link in the countries that intervene, is to be put to the credit of native artists or of foreigners from Venice and the East. That it was inspired by the influence of Byzantine art cannot be seriously denied, but whether the artists as-^- well as the art came from the East is less certain. The first suggestion of a better way of covering large interiors than the unstable barrel vaults of native efforts came most likely from Greeks or Venetians who followed the *-- line of commerce through the district. Or perhaps some French architect may have travelled eastward and studied S. Mark's and perhaps S. Sophia, and brought back with him measurements and notes of what he had seen. But in either case the work would have been carried out by the Modified hands of native artisans who while following the general scheme given by the architect, native or foreign as the case might be, would import into the execution much of their native methods of building. We can understand how in this way the style would gradually drift, as it actually did, farther and farther from strict Byzantine example ; and how, after beginning with a tolerably close imitation of S. Mark's at Perigueux, it ended in the quasi-domes of Le Puy, Poitiers and Angers, which preserve the idea of the oriental domical covering without its construction. It would seem that the dome did not make its 42 52 FRANCE AQUITAINE [CH. xix Generally appearance in Aquitaine till the I2th century. The barrel earlier type of covering was the barrel vault, which still remains in many churches in combination with the dome, or without it. S. Hilaire at Poitiers, and the older or Latin church at Prigueux had originally a wooden roof to the nave, and the aisles alone were vaulted, but before the 1 2th century most churches of any consequence had stone roofs. Notre Dame at Poitiers has a barrel vault over the nave, and the aisles are cross-groined with a single transverse rib dividing the bays. The church of Montierneuf at Poitiers has vaults of the same kind, though the columns and a great part of the building are modernised. The two churches at Chauvigny have barrel vaults with cross-groined aisles and transverse arches ; that at Civray has barrel vaults over the aisles as well as over the nave, and so has that at S. Junien. In all these churches except Montierneuf, which has a high choir of later work, one roof covers both nave and aisles in an unbroken slope, thus forbidding a clerestory. In consequence the upper parts of the nave are very dark. There is no better example of this kind of building s. Savin than the fine church of S. SAVIN, which is remarkable for its lofty proportions and its painted decoration (Plate CII). Temple de This western side of France still possesses one of the Poitiers' few buildings that go back to Merovingian times, which "Nmay help us a little to understand the architecture so highly lauded by Sidonius Apollinaris in the 5th, and Gregory of Tours in the 6th century. The TEMPLE DE S. JEAN, as it is called, at POITIERS, is an ancient baptistery, now sunk deep below the level of the modern streets, and bearing manifest signs of antiquity. It is supposed to have been built by Bishop Ansoaldus (682- 686) but has evidently undergone repair and alterations. CH. xix] FRANCE AQUITAINE 53 It is a rectangular building (Fig. 82), gabled north and south, with apses projected from the east and the two sides. On the west it has a narthex of later date. The principal apse, towards the east, is polygonal inside but square without, as the side apses may once have been, though they are now rounded. The arches opening into the apses spring from columns with Corinthianising POITIERS, TEttPLE BE 5"FJEAN ~ 10 if 2,0 2,5- 3,0 rr Fig. 90 (Texier). is that of the Syrian church at Ezra (v. sup. vol. I. p. 33, Fig. 6) and belongs to the family of which the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Constantinople is a more advanced member (v. sup. vol. i. p. 78, Fig. 19). The octagonal baptistery of the cathedral of Frejus also has four deep niches in the oblique sides, " an attempt," says Mr McGibbon "to make the floor as square as possible," and this again seems to have some analogy with the plan of the Pantheon at Riez. 8o FRANCE PROVENCE [CH. xx Byzantine The impress of Byzantine art however, except in the SritedTn matter of statuary, is not so marked in Provence as in Provence^ Aquitaine, where it affected not merely the ornament but the construction of the architecture. In Provence Gallo- Roman tradition ruled so strongly that it seems to have prevented that development of architecture into some- thing further, which took place in the rest of France. Viollet-le-Duc says " Auvergne, but for the cathedral of Clermont, and Provence never adopted Gothic architec- Gothic not ture, and this last province which only became French at p^OTem-e" 1 the end of the I5th century, passed from Romanesque architecture degenerated to the architecture of the Renaissance, having yielded only too late and too im- perfectly to the influence of the monuments of the north 1 ." He remarks that the Provencal school, however remarkable at its outset, "seemed struck with impotence, and produced nothing but curious mixtures of various imitations which could give birth to nothing fresh ; and in the 1 3th century it sank into decadence." He compares these splendid portals at Aries and S. Gilles disadvantageously with those of Notre Dame at Paris. We may not entirely agree with him there, though no doubt he is justified in drawing a contrast between the progressive character of the northern school, and the semi-Byzantine stationary qualities of that of Provence. Refine- But if about the latter there may be something of the the"pro- softness and languor of the south, it has also in a marked degree the refinement of the ancient art from which it sprang, the reflexion of an ancient civilization, and the romance of the land of the Troubadours to which it belongs. In Provence we have Romanesque art without its ruggedness. Elsewhere it is tinged with barbarism. At 1 Diet. Rais. vol. I. p. 150, CH. xx] FRANCE PROVENCE 81 S. Albans and Winchester, and in the great 1 2th century churches on the Rhine there is nothing to soften the hard barren outlines of the ponderous construction. At Durham, Waltham, and Norwich the scanty ornamenta- tion of the piers only serves to accentuate their rudeness. But the Romanesque of Provence has all the delicacy of an advanced art bestowed on the simple and strenuous forms of a round-arched style. The buildings we have been considering have a loveliness all their own, and a certain poetical quality that is perhaps wanting in the later triumphs of architecture at Paris or even at Chartres and Amiens. J. A. II. CHAPTER XXI TOULOUSE The THE county of Toulouse, including Languedoc, was ToSouse f r a l n g ti me unconnected with the French crown, and it was not till 1229, after the desolation wrought by the ^wars of religion, that the greater part of the territory was added to France. The first king to make any pretension to authority within its limits was Louis VII who had married his sister to the reigning count. But the distance from Paris and royal domain, the differences of language and laws continued to keep the people of this province distinct from those of the north. Persecu- They were brought into cruel relation to them however in the 1 2th century and afterwards, by the crusade preached in 1208 against the Albigenses whose tenets they favoured. "The war was prosecuted with every atrocious barbarity which superstition the mother of crimes could inspire. Languedoc, a country for that age flourishing and civilized, was laid waste, her cities burned, her inhabitants swept away by fire and the sword 1 ." It is therefore not surprising that the remains of Romanesque architecture in the county of Toulouse are s. Sernin, not abundant. The great church of S. SERNIN at TOULOUSE Toulouse j s t jj e most important monument of the style in the 1 Hallam, Middle Ages, chap. i. CH. xxt] FRANCE TOULOUSE 83 nth century (Fig. 91). It is an immense cruciform church, s. Semm, with double aisles to the nave, and a single aisle sur- rounding both the sides and ends of the transepts, and it finishes eastward in an apse surrounded by an am- bulatory aisle, with five semi-circular chapels projecting from it. It thus possesses every feature of the complete plan of French ecclesiology. The nave is less than 30 ft. wide, and strikes one as narrow for so vast an edifice. Viollet-le-Duc however ",^ : -^.\^^^"^J^v^^^" : ^^^.^ ^ Fig. 91. takes it as a pattern of good proportion, so pleasing that he was led to study it analytically, and found it was entirely set out on angles of 60 and 45, the total and intermediate heights being given by isosceles triangles with sides at the angle of 45, and by equilateral triangles 1 . Over the crossing rises a lofty steeple of octagonal stages set inwards one by one, and finishing with a spire (Plate CIX). To support this, which is a later addition, the four piers at the crossing have had to be enlarged at 1 Diet. Rats. vol. vn. pp. 539-542. 62 84 FRANCE TOULOUSE [CH. xxi s. Semin, the expense of the interior view of the nave, on which Toulouse , 1 t> t_i they encroach disagreeably. The nave has a round barrel vault counterthrust by quadrant vaults over the triforium which of course forbid ^a clerestory. On the south side is a porch and doorway with a stilted round arch of two deep moulded orders on jamb shafts, containing in the tympanum a marble relief of the Ascension. In the details classic tradition shows itself, especially in the cornice with sculptured brackets by way of modillions across the base of the gable. The In the apse, with its ambulatory and projecting ^"chapels, we have the French chevet completely de- veloped. The earliest Christian churches of course had no chapels. The Greek church to this date only allows a single altar. The earliest cathedrals in France seem to have been without chapels, and indeed without ambu- latories. Many of those in the south and west of France still end in plain apses like the cathedral of Angers, or even end square like that of Poitiers and several of the domed churches of Perigord. Autun, built in the middle of the I2th century, ends directly with three apses for choir and side aisles, and no ambulatory or radiating chapels ; and this is the old basilican plan of the Pantocrator at Constantinople, and scores of churches in Italy and Dalmatia. The cathedrals of Sens and Langres, built towards the end of the i2th century, finish with an ambulatory and a single chapel pro- jecting beyond it at the east end. As early however as the nth century chapels appear in greater number, sometimes attached directly to the wall of the main apse as at Cahors, Souillac and Angouleme (v. sup. Fig. 77), sometimes divided from it by an ambulatory aisle as at Vignory, Plate CIX S. SERNIN TOULOUSE Plate CX .,.,JJ: S. BERTRAND DE COMMINGES CH. xxi] FRANCE TOULOUSE 85 Fontevrault, Agen, and the churches of Auvergne. They The were more numerous in conventual churches than in cathe- drals or parish churches at first, probably because of the jealous exclusion of the laity from the choir which was re- served for the brethren, and this necessitated the provision of other places for the people. But as time went on chapels clustered as thickly round the apses of the cathedrals as round those of the abbeys, and Le Mans has no fewer than thirte.cn. In England the chevet with radiating The chapels is found at Westminster, and nowhere else ; but England Westminster though English in detail is French in plan. Something of the kind is attempted at Pershore, but very ineffectively. At Tewkesbury the attempt is more successful, but even there the resemblance to the French chevet is very imperfect, and the architectural effect falls very far short of the foreign model, or indeed of the regular English square termination, with a fine east window. At S. BERTRAND DE COMMINGES, on a foot-hill of the s. Ber- Pyrenees where they melt into the plain, is a single aisled abbey church ending in a simple apse. The i2th century mm s es cloister attached to it is in a sad state of decay (Plate CX), many of the details being quite unrecognizable. The capitals which are large and disproportioned are carved elaborately with scrolls and figures, and rest on coupled columns, except that in one case the pier is composed of the four evangelists placed back to back against a central shaft, each holding in his arms the apocalyptic beast which is his emblem. At the foot of the hill the little church of S. JUST has s. just a fine Romanesque doorway with figures of saints in the jambs serving as supports to the archway. The slopes of the Pyrenees near Luchon are dotted 86 FRANCE TOULOUSE [CH. xxi Pyrenean with little village churches dating from the i2th century with little or no alteration. They have barrel vaults with transverse ribs springing from flat pilasters to divide the bays, and apses with semi-domes. The arcaded cornice is common, and few of the humblest village churches are without it, often very roughly worked. Their towers, when they have any, have mid-wall shafts in the windows, S. Aventin Fig. 92. and the apses are covered with semi-domes. The doors often have sculpture, sometimes of marble, executed in a less grotesque fashion than contemporary work in the north. Occasionally as at S. Just, and S. Bertrand the figures are really excellent. The church of the mountain village of S. AVENTIN (Fig. 92) is a considerable building, with a central and South Portal MO I SS AC Plate The Cloister MOISSAC CH. xxi] FRANCE TOULOUSE 87 also a western tower, both pierced by windows with mid- wall shafts. It is a three-aisled basilican church, the nave barrel-vaulted with transverse ribs, and the aisles cross-groined. The proportion is narrow and lofty, and the building ends eastward with three apses. The abbey of MOISSAC, north of Toulouse, is a single- Abbey of aisled apsidal church, of which the nave was re-built in the 1 5th century. At the west end however it has the original Romanesque tower, to which was added on the south side a magnificent outer portal, and at the same time the tower was turned into a fortress by the addition of a parapet walk round it with crenellation over the entrance. Fortified churches are not uncommon in this district, which suffered severely during the crusades against the Albigenses, The portal is magnificently sculptured. The arch like that at S. Trophime is very slightly pointed and its three orders are divided by a slender reed-like feature that serves for shaft in the jamb and arch in the head, the capital being only marked by a band or knot of carving. This has a later look than 1 1 50, the date assigned to it by Viollet-le-Duc. In the tympanum Christ Sculpture sits, imperially crowned and enthroned, with the four rtl typical beasts around him, who regard him with an ecstasy which is expressed in a very lively manner. The rest of the space is occupied by the 24 elders who wear crowns and hold musical instruments. Across the lintel is a fine row of rosettes dished round a raised central flower, which has a Byzantine character. The jambs of the doorway (Plate CXI), are curiously scalloped, and the shafts next the opening follow the scalloped outline. The sides of the porch, which projects in front and carries a barrel vault, have two arches on each side containing sculptured figures and a frieze over 88 FRANCE TOULOUSE [CH. xxi Moissac them. On one side is represented the parable of Dives and Lazarus : the beggar is lying at the foot of the rich man's table while an angel carries his soul to Abraham, who receives it in his bosom. On the opposite side is the Presentation in the Temple and the flight into Egypt. The central column which divides the doorway and supports the tympanum is composed of animals interlaced like one at Souillac which has been mentioned above, and like the intertwined figures of Saxon manuscripts or Scandinavian carving. Another touch of northern grotesque is the monster at each end of the lintel from whose mouth proceed the ends of the threads which form the border of the rosettes. The figure carving here, though lively and full of spirit, is very inferior to that of Aries and S. Gilles. The attitudes are forced and extravagant, the figures are attenuated and drawn out beyond all proportion, and the modelling is wanting in breadth and simplicity. It is the work of a very different school, which has little trace of either Roman or Byzantine influence, but in which, with all its imperfections, one seems to see the seeds of growth and of the future Gothic art. Cloister, The cloister of Moissac (Plate CXI I) is one of the finest in France though it has been a great deal altered since it was first built. Its original date is given by an inscription which with its abbreviations expanded reads as follows : ANNO AB INCARNATIONE yETERNI PRINCIPIS MILLESIMO CENTESIMO FACTVM EST CLAVSTRVM ISTVD TEMPORE DOMINI ANSQVITILII ABBATIS . AMEN V V V M D M R R R F F F CH. xxij FRANCE TOULOUSE 89 No explanation has ever been found of these mysterious initials ; they have puzzled all the antiquaries. The sculptures and the capitals no doubt belong to the date of the inscription, but the cloister was re-built early in the 1 2th century, when the abbey adopted the rule of Citeaux, and the old carvings were re-fixed in the new work. The arches of the cloister are now pointed instead of being round and it is not vaulted but has a wooden roof. CHAPTER XXII BURGUNDY The Bur- THE Burgundians differed from other barbarian settlers in Gaul, such as the Franks, in that they were Christians before their arrival. The ecclesiastical historian tells naively the story of their conversion. Being ravaged by the Huns "they did not " he says " fly for help to any man in their extremity, but decided to turn to some God. And understanding that the God of the Romans gave powerful succour to those who feared him, they all with common accord came to believe in Christ. And going to a city of Gaul they begged Christian baptism of the bishop." A subsequent victory over a vastly superior host of Huns confirmed their faith, and after that " the nation Christianized fervently 1 ." When the Burgundians therefore established themselves in Gaul in the time of Honorius they did so peacefully, not as invaders but as allies of the Romans, and they even turned their swords occasionally in defence of the empire against encroaching Visigoths. Their kingdom lasted till 532 when it was finally conquered by the Franks under the sons of Clovis. The Bur- They are described by Sidonius Apollinaris who visited m sth ans their king Chilperic at Lyons about 474, as not unfriendly century neighbours, hairy giants, genial and kindly, but gross in their feeding, and coarse in their habits ; and his fastidious 1 Siairvpus expumdvio-fv. Socrates, EccL Hist. vui. 30. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 91 taste was offended by their loud voices, their noisy feasts, their rank cookery, their habit of greasing their hair with rancid butter, and the fumes of onions and garlic from their kitchens 1 . It is curious to find that it was among the descendants Burgundy -,..., , . . the home of this jovial easy-tempered people that monasticism ofMon- established itself more firmly than in any other part of a western Europe. Yet so it was ; from the great religious centres of Cluny, Citeaux, and Clairvaux the passion for an ascetic coenobite life spread far and wide, and thousands of convents obeyed the Cluniac or Cistercian rule in every part of western Christendom. Monasticism is a product of the East, where the rule Eastern of S. Basil was established in the 4th century, and at Monasti- its first introduction into the west it was viewed with clsm disfavour. The funeral at Rome of Blaesilla, a young nun who died it was said from excessive fasting, nearly caused a popular riot in 384. The people, says S. Jerome cried " when will they drive this detestable race of monks from the town ? Why do they not stone them ? Why do they not throw them into the river 2 ." It was not till the first half of the 5th century that monasticism spread, and really established itself in the west ; and then it did 1 Quid me .... Inter crinigeras situm catervas, Et Germanica verba sustinentem, Laudantem tetrico subinde vultu Quod Burgundio cantat esculentus, Infundens acido comam butyro. ******* Felices oculos tuos et aures, Felicemque libet vocare nasum, Cui non allia, sordidaque cepae Ructant mane novo decem apparatus. Carmen xil ad V. C. Catullinum. 2 Guizot, Civilization in France, Lecture XIV. 92 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn so only sporadically : but at the beginning of the 6th cen- tury the system was reduced to order at Monte Cassino Rule of in Italy by S. Benedict of Nursia, whose rule was soon obeyed all over western Europe so completely, that Charlemagne caused enquiry to be made throughout his empire whether monks could be found of any other order 1 . Abbey of The Benedictine rule had become lax in Burgundy when the abbey of CLUNY near Macon was founded in 909 by William Duke of Aquitaine. Stricter discipline was restored, and the policy was established of bringing other convents into filial relation with Cluny as their head. The same policy was adopted by the daughter The house of CITEAUX, which was founded in 1098, and in Cistercians j j ^ o was released from dependence on the parent abbey. The Cistercian rule was obeyed by countless convents in France, Italy, and Germany ; and in England it included the great abbeys of Buildwas, Byland, Fountains, Furness, Kirkstall, Netley, Rievaulx, and Tintern, be- Affiiiation sides other and smaller houses. Each of these two great ofconvents B ur g un dian monasteries therefore was the head of a confederation that extended far beyond the limits of the province and even of the kingdom. Over it the abbot ruled like a sovereign ; the patronage of the headship of each subordinate house was vested in him, and any monastery that wished to enter the order was obliged to consent to receive his nominee when a vacancy occurred. Subject at first to the bishops, the monks after a long struggle won their independence of episcopal control, and acknowledged no authority but that of Rome. At the latter part of the nth century the ancient abbeys of V^zelay, S. Gilles, Moissac, Limoges, Poitiers, Figeac, S. Germain 1'Auxerrois, Mauzac, and S. Berlin de Lille, 1 Guizot, Civilization in France, Lecture Xiv. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 93 sought and obtained admission to the order of Cluny. In the nth century three hundred and fourteen monas- teries and churches submitted to the rule of Abbot S. Hugh, who reigned like a temporal prince, and struck money in his own mint, like the king of France himself. It will easily be understood that the existence of these Effect of powerful half-independent institutions in Burgundy had teHe^on its effect on the civilization, and with it on the arts of that province. In those ages of misrule, and disorder, in a land desolated by barbarian invasions and constant wars, where society was sinking into a sort of chaos, it was only in the convents that any security could be found, and that the peaceful arts and agriculture could be carried on without interruption. But more than this : by the rule of S. Benedict manual labour was actually made a Manual duty, on the same level as self-denial and obedience. JjJjSHed This was the great revolution which S. Benedict in- troduced into the monastic system. " Laziness," he said, " is the enemy of the soul, and consequently the brothers should at certain times occupy themselves in manual labour ; at others in holy reading 1 ." Round their walls forests were cleared and land was reclaimed ; and within them literature dragged on a feeble life, and the manual arts were practised with gradually increasing skill. No- Crafts where beyond the convent precincts were artizans to be cloister found, or at all events but very rarely, and each establish- ment had to rely on its own resources to supply its needs. The lay guilds or confraternities of artizans that existed in Italy had not yet appeared in France, and the inmates of the convents had to be their own builders, masons, carpenters, glaziers, and to fulfil every function of the building trade. It must be remembered that they were 1 Guizot, Civilization in France^ Lecture xiv. 94 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Monks not necessarily ecclesiastics. Many, perhaps most, of Symen the monks were laymen. In the early time they were even discouraged from taking orders, and while the bishops in the 4th and 5th centuries took precautions to limit the ordination of monks, the monks themselves sometimes regarded the priesthood as a snare which inter- fered with their duty of divine contemplation 1 . Therefore many inmates of the convents were artizans, and according to the rule of S. Benedict they were to continue working at their crafts, though they were not to take any pride in them. In the i2th century, one Bernard of Tiron who founded a religious house near Chartres, gathered into it " craftsmen both of wood and iron, carvers and goldsmiths, painters and stonemasons, vinedressers and husbandmen, and others skilled in all manner of cunning work 2 ." The rapid spread of the order gave the craftsmen constant and regular employment. They worked with zeal and enthusiasm, and their efforts resulted as might have been expected in forming a school of architecture in which we find the first seeds of progress and the first signs of growth and development. The In 1089 Abbot Hugh began to re-build the church church of at CujNY, the number of monks having outgrown the existing building. No great church was built in those days without a miracle, and S. Peter is said to have given the plan in a dream to the monk Gauzon who laid the foundations. The great church was finished by another Clunist, Hezelon, a Fleming, from Liege. It was the vastest church in the west of Europe. The nave was covered with a barrel vault like the churches already described ; there were double aisles ; two transepts with 1 Guizot, Civilization in France, Lecture xiv. 8 Ordericus Vitalis, cited Baldwin Brown, Early Art in England. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 95 apsidal chapels on their eastern side ; a chevet with The ambulatory and five semi-circular chapels ; a large narthex or ante-church five bays long, quite a church by itself; and at the extreme west end two towers. It was not dedicated till 1131, and the narthex was only finished in I22O 1 . The conventual buildings were all in proportion, the The refectory being 100 ft. in length by 60 ft. in width which buildings would require, one would think, a row of pillars down the middle. The side walls were decorated with paintings of biblical subjects, and portraits of founders and bene- factors, and on the end wall was represented the Last Judgment. Over each of the two crossings of the church was a tower, and two more towers rose over the ends of the western transept. Cluny stood unaltered till the Revolution, but beyond a few walls nothing now remains except part of the southern great transept with the tower upon it. The arches are pointed, and the tower is brought into an octagonal lantern and has rather a German look. The flat pilasters are fluted and have capitals of a Corinthianizing character, mixed with others of animals and grotesques. In this we see the effect of Roman example which can be traced throughout the Burgundian buildings, though its influence was not strong enough to impede the further development of the style as it did in Provence. Cluny had been founded by the reforming party in Luxury of the Benedictine order who tried to bring it back to its original unworldliness and voluntary poverty. But as has been the case in all similar attempts human nature was 1 V.-le-Duc, Diet. Rais. vol. I. p. 258. He says elsewhere that this was the only instance in France of a double transept. It occurs however also at S. Quentin. 9 6 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn ciuny too strong for the reformers ; as Cluny grew in power and wealth it fell into ways of luxury and ostentation, and the new abbey church was made as stately and ornate as the art of the day allowed. This departure from the original principles of the Benedictine rule offended the stricter members of the order, and led to a second reformation. The abbey of Founda- CiTEAUX was founded in 1098 by one-and-twenty Bene- CiteaJL dictines from Cluny, who were shocked at the growing 10 9 8 luxury and splendour of the parent house, and retired to a desert place and extreme simplicity of life. The fame of the order grew rapidly, especially after S. Bernard joined its ranks, and in twenty-five years the Cistercians had spread over Europe and numbered 60,000. The constitution of the order, which was drawn up in 1119, Severity of laid down strict rules for the buildings. The monastery architect Close was to contain all necessary workshops, a mill, and a garden, so that the monks need not go abroad. The church was to be of great simplicity ; there were to be no paintings or sculptures ; the glass was to be white without cross or ornament, and the bell-tower was to be low and unostentatious. s.Bemard In the year 1091 S. Bernard was born of a knightly family near Dijon. He entered the convent of Citeaux at the age of 22, and before he was 24 he was elected first abbot of the daughter house of CLAIRVAUX. His new abbey was built strictly according to the severe Cistercian rules, and the Emperor Lothaire who visited it with his suite was struck with its modest simplicity. In a letter to William, Abbot of S. Theoderic (Thierry), S. Bernard inveighs against the luxuriousness of the Cluniacs. He condemns the splendid dress of the monks : " a King, or an Emperor," he says, " might wear our garments if they CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 97 were cut to his fashion." He exposes the parade of the s. Bernard bishops and abbots, who carry all their furniture and plate about with them when they travel. " Could you not use the same vessel for sprinkling your hands, and drinking your wine ? Could you not have a candle with- out carrying about your own candlestick, and that of gold or silver ? Could not the same servant be both groom and bedmaker, and also wait at table?" Alluding no doubt to the great church then building at Cluny, he speaks of the immense heights of the oratories, their Condemns immoderate lengths, their great empty widths, their te'cufre * sumptuous finish, their curious paintings, which attract the eyes of the worshippers and hinder their devotions, and seem to represent mainly the ancient rite of the Jews. " What fruit," he continues, " do we expect from all this, the admiration of fools, or the offerings of the simple ? " " Even on the floor are images of saints, which we tread upon. Men spit in the face of an angel, and trample on the features of saints." Then he turns to the cloisters and their carving. Condemns " Why these unclean apes ? Why these savage lions ? 8 Why these monstrous centaurs ? Why the half-men ? W T hy the spotted tigers ? Why the trumpeting hunts- men ? You may see many bodies with one head, and again many heads on one body ; quadrupeds with the tail of a serpent, fish with the head of a quadruped, beasts, in front a horse, dragging half a goat behind. Here a horned animal carries a horse behind. In short there appears so great and strange a variety of divers forms that you may if you please read in marble instead of books, and spend the whole day in looking at these things one by one rather than in meditating on the law J. A. II. 7 98 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn of God. Good God ! if you are not ashamed of such silly things, why do you not grudge the expense 1 ?" influence These Puritan principles, however, did little to check . s~^. A. A the artistic ardour of the nth and i2th centuries. Art on design wag a jj ve . j n those days it ran in the blood of both Burgundian, Frank and Proven9al. The utmost the Cistercian rule did was to direct the character of archi- tectural design, not to hinder it. The early Cistercian buildings are plain and unadorned with sculpture, but they are not the less beautifully designed, and they illus- trate the great truth, so often forgotten, that architecture does not depend on ornament, and may, if required, do without it. Just as the Moslem managed to build beauti- fully and romantically though his religion debarred him from the resources of sculpture, so the Cistercians, while obeying the severe restrictions of their rule in the matter of decoration, have managed to leave us some of the loveliest buildings of the Middle Ages. Ruin of Of Cluny, as we have seen, little enough remains. What is left of Citeaux and Clairvaux chiefly modern has been turned in one case into a penitentiary, in the other into a prison. The great church of S. Bernard, where he was buried, was pulled down not by the revolutionaries, but by the restored Bourbon king. We can only conjecture their vanished splendours by the analogy of contemporary Burgundian buildings, of which the province fortunately possesses many fine examples 2 . Abbey of The abbey church of VEZELAY was begun in 1089, at ^ same t j me as tne new cnurc h at Cluny, but at Ve"zelay the art took a great step forward. While 1 Sancti Bernardi op. ed. Mabillon, vol. I. Apologia ad Guillelmum Sancti Theoderici Abbatem, cap. x. XL xn. 2 M. V.-le-Duc says that the church at Citeaux had a square east end. Cluny and Clairvaux were apsidal. Diet, JRais. vol. i. p. 2702. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 99 at Cluny, as also at Autun and other churches which Vezeiay were built 60 or 70 years later, the nave was covered with a barrel vault, at Vezeiay for the first time the attempt was made to apply to the great nave. vault the principle of cross-vaulting- which had till then only been employed in the lesser vaults of the aisles. This was a great step in advance, and paved the way for the further development of vaulting into the Gothic construction of rib and panel. It got rid at once of a constructional difficulty and a practical inconvenience. The difficulty of constructing a barrel vaulted nave inconven lay in the necessary buttressing, for its thrust was con- barrel f tinuous along the whole length of the wall. Consequently vaults in the churches of the Auvergne, and at S. Sernin, Toulouse, and many others the side aisles were vaulted with quadrant vaults, half semi-circular, starting from a stout outside wall, and abutting on the nave wall against the springing of the main central vault. The inconvenience of this is that no clerestory windows are possible, and the nave, lit only from the ends, is very dark. To remedy this the next step was to raise the nave and to form a clerestory. But in doing this the nave vault was deprived of the support of the aisle vaults, and disaster followed. At Autun an improvement was made by making the nave barrel vault pointed instead of Pointed round, which diminished the thrust, but not effectually, vaults at and before long flying buttresses had to be applied to Autun resist it 1 . At the best this plan only allowed very small clerestory windows, low down in the wall, below the springing of the barrel vault. The obvious way of 1 The fine church at Saulieu is vaulted with a pointed barrel vault in the same manner, and the walls have given way in consequence. When I saw it in 1908 its condition seemed very perilous. 72 ioo FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn getting large clerestory windows was to cross-vault the Difficulties nave, but this presented difficulties of another kind. The vaulting aisles had long been cross-vaulted after the Roman the nave f^ion. Their bays were generally square in plan, and the intersection of two equal cylinders presented no difficulty. But the nave being perhaps twice as wide as the aisles, the bay of vaulting would not be square but oblong ; and consequently the transverse arch and cross section would be so much wider than the wall arch and the longitudinal section that the two cylinders would not intersect agreeably. This difficulty was got over at S. Ambrogio in Milan by making each bay of the nave vault as long as two bays of the aisle which brought it to a square plan, and made the intersection regular (v. sup. vol. i. p. 262, Fig. 58). This, however, is not the way followed at Vezelay, where the nave vault corresponds bay by bay with that of the aisle (Fig. 93). No attempt was made to raise the side arches to the level of the transverse, but they were high enough to give plenty of room for a good clerestory, and their cross vault was ramped upwards intersecting with the main longitudinal vault as best it could. In this way a good light was acquired for the nave, and the difficulty of the continuous thrust of a barrel vault was avoided. Resultant For the effect of cross-vaulting is to concentrate all the thcross thrust on isolated points, that is on the piers that divide bay from bay. But the system was not complete, for the builders of Vezelay did not understand at first the need of strengthening these points sufficiently to take this concentrated thrust : and to their surprise the vaults began to push the walls out, the arches became distorted, and at the end of the 1 2th century flying buttresses had to be applied at the points where resistance was required. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 101 Fig- 93 (V.-le-Duc). 102 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Still the step first taken at Ve"zelay was a great advance on previous construction, and led on naturally to the further development of vaulting on more scientific principles. The choir and transepts of Vezelay were re-built in the 1 3th century, between 1198 and 1206', in a vigorous early pointed style, of which they afford one of the finest examples. But the Romanesque nave which was dedicated about 1102 remains, and the narthex which was Vezelay, dedicated in 1132. In the latter, benefiting by their experience of the nave, the builders adopted a more secure way of supporting the main vault. The narthex, like that at Cluny is a church by itself (Plate CXI 1 1), with a nave and aisles, three bays long and two storeys in height. The aisles are cross vaulted in the lower storey, while the upper, which is a triforium or gallery, has a ramping vault that gives effectual abutment to the vault of the central nave. In the narthex the pointed arch makes its appearance in the constructive features for the first time. All the nave arches are round. The nave and aisles are in a sombre round-arched style ; and the stringcourses and labels are heavy, and decorated with rosettes, a favourite Burgundian ornament. The piers are compound, with attached shafts ; and the arches, as well as the transverse ribs of the vault are built with alternate voussoirs of white and dark brown stone, one of the few instances of polychrome masonry in France. There is no triforium, and the clerestory windows are plain semi-circular headed openings, splayed all round both inside and out. A characteristic feature 1 V.-le-Duc, vol. I. p. 232. He says the Abbot Hugh was deposed in the last year for having run the monastery into debt to the amount of 2220 silver livres or ^45,600 of our money. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 103 in the design is a wavy heralds would call it nebuly ornament that runs round the wall arches, and the small outer order, or one might almost call it the label of the transverse arches of the nave vault. The great west doorway leading from the narthex to the nave (Plate CXI 1 1) is perhaps the finest product of l Burgundian Romanesque. It is round arched, and has the usual central pillar dividing the opening and sup- porting a horizontal lintel. In the middle of the semi- circular tympanum is a figure of Christ in a Vesica, bestowing the gift of the Holy Spirit on His disciples, typified by rays emanating from His fingers, and directed to them severally. Round them is a semi-circle of figure subjects in square panels, which is interrupted by the top of the Vesica. There are two orders in the including arch : the inner is filled with small figure-subjects in 29 little circles, representing the signs of the Zodiac, and the occupations of threshing, reaping, putting corn into a sack, and so on. The outer order has a series of con- ventional bosses. The smaller figures on the lintel and in the com- Figure partments of the arch have defied interpretation. It is difficult to see the meaning of the men and women with dog's heads or pig's snouts, or of the dwarf about to mount on horseback with the aid of a ladder. The larger figures in their convoluted draperies show the influence of Byzantine art, but the sculpture is far removed from the style of that at Aries and S. Gilles. All trace of classic grace is gone, and the design is rather barbarous. The figures are attenuated, and dispropor- tioned, and thrown into attitudes that are forced and extravagant. And yet in spite of its barbarism, the work has not only an undeniable life and spirit but also a 104 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn vezeiay kind of primitive refinement. A certain delicacy is given by its peculiar method of execution. The figures are carved as it were in low relief on a flat surface which is then sunk all round them to some depth. This same treatment may be observed in the beautiful Byzantinesque scrolls on the lintels of the north and south doorways at Bourges where the leaves and flowers are carved with a very flat treatment, and much undercut, which gives them a very precious and delicate effect and apparently almost the frailty of paper. There is the same treatment on the rather rude classic frieze of the Roman arch at Susa. Much of the effect of this grand doorway is owing to the central pier, with its double tier of shafts below and figures above, spreading out to great width as it rises ; the upper part immediately below the lintel being oc- cupied by a figure of the Baptist, holding a large disc with a mutilated figure of the mystic lamb, for which the disc formed a nimbus. The same division into two tiers is observed in the jambs. v&eiay, In many parts of the church, both Romanesque and House" later, the influence of Roman art is observable, but it is even more remarkably displayed in the Chapter House which dates from about H5O 1 . The great consoles or brackets from which the vaulting ribs spring have the volutes, the foliage, the hollow abacus and the rosette of Sculpture the Corinthian capital (Plate CXIV). There is no trace of Byzantine feeling in the leaves, which have the deep channelled folds, the piping and the rounded raffling of the Roman type, as distinct from that of the East. The same influence is observable in the vestibule or cloister to which the Chapter House opens, with its square fluted 1 V.-le-Duc, VIH. p. 211. Plate CX1V VEZELAY CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 105 piers and arches (Fig. 94). It has left its mark also on the later choir, which dates from the last year of the 1 2th century and is in a thoroughly developed pointed Roman style. The great columns of the apse are monoliths, tapered and with an entasis : one wonders whether they may not be real antiques used at secondhand ; and in the Fig. 94. triforium of the apse and that of the north transept square fluted shafts occur among the ordinary round ones. The same broad Roman treatment characterizes the nave capitals in the fine Romanesque church at AVALLON and the details of its famous western portals. This church is basilican in plan, with nave and side aisles each ending in an apse, and owing to the slope of the site the floor descends from west to east instead of io6 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Avaiion ascending in the usual manner. The effect of this is not otherwise than agreeable, and the plan might be adopted with advantage in modern churches where similar diffi- culties of level present themselves. The nave is cross- vaulted, with transverse ribs only, and the aisles also, but they are so narrow that their vaults are longer than they are wide, and as the transverse arches are not much stilted, they have the effect of arched surfaces from one transverse rib to another, and the groins almost disappear. The old system of the barrel vault has gone, and that of the cross vault is being tentatively applied. All the main arches are pointed. The great portals, which consist of a large doorway to the nave and a lesser one to the south aisle, are full of elaborate but unequal detail. The jambs have columns divided by a particularly beautiful upright acanthus leaf border. Some of the columns are plain, some smooth spirals ; others are polygonal and twisted, and one is spiral and carved like chain mail which looks as if it ought to collapse. In the arch of the smaller doorway the scroll-work has a ropy look which is not happy, and the great rosettes on one order are coarse and out of scale with the delicate ornament of the jambs. The same ropy scrolls, and coarse rosettes appear in the south aisle doorway at Ve"zelay. A band of the Guilloche or Greek fret runs round the lesser arch, carved in that perspective manner which occurs also at S. Gilles, and in many ancient mosaic pavements. stages of In the ornamental sculpture at Ve"zelay and Avallon San 8 we seem to see the early Burgundian school in three sculpture successive stages. In the nave at Ve"zelay the capitals abound in grotesques and figure stories, many of them of religious significance, but some of the type on which CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 107 S. Bernard pours his sarcasm. In the narthex, the Bur foliaged capital begins to take the place of these storied compositions, though some of them occur too. But in the Chapter House at Vezelay and at Avallon the purer Corinthian type prevails, so that one wonders whether S. Bernard's diatribes had their effect. It is interesting to see how, while in so short a period as that covered by these buildings the Burgundian carvers made a great advance in technique, they clung with determination to the model supplied by classic art, so that their later work is often nearer to Roman example than their earlier. Fig. 95- The Cistercian abbey church of PONTIGNY about Abbey of 10 miles from Auxerre contrasts strongly with the splen- dour of the Cluniac buildings. It was built in the latter part of the i2th century with a severity of design that would have satisfied S. Bernard himself. The only tower is a piquant little turret and spire on one side of the faade which is treated with much simplicity ; and the great doorway leading to the nave has a plain cross in the tympanum instead of the sculptures of Vezelay, or Moissac. Some of the capitals in the nave are little io8 . FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Pontigny more than geometrical blocks, as abstract as the Moslem capitals in the forecourts of mosques at Constantinople (Fig. 95). But with all its severity the church is beautiful. Let S. Bernard do his best with his spiritual fork, the artistic Burgundian nature nevertheless "usque recurrit." It shows itself in the delicate proportions, in the chaste virginal restraint of the general effect, in the few con- cessions made to sculptor's art in the matter of simply foliaged capitals, which with all their severity are ad- mirable in their way, and in the glazing of the windows, where though painted glass was forbidden by the strict Cistercian rule, the glazier has revelled in fancy patterns of lead-work. Autun The cathedral at AUTUN is later than Ve"zelay, but the ra nave retains the pointed barrel roof on transverse arches of the early constructive method, although in the arcades the round arch has given way to the pointed (Fig. 96). Flat pilasters, fluted, carry the nave arches and form the sides of the piers ; flat fluted pilasters in front of them rise through triforium and clerestory to carry the transverse ribs of the vaults. Smaller pilasters, flat and fluted like the others divide the round-headed arches of the triforium. A heavy stringcourse carved with simple rosettes like those at Vdzelay and Avallon, runs below the triforium, and a smaller one above it is studded with round pellets. Of the capitals some are composed of foliage, twisted, re- verted and tied, but many are storied with figure subjects. The bases are Attic in section and tolerably correct. The aisles are cross-groined with transverse ribs but no diagonals. The nave barrel vault springs so low down that there is only room for very small clerestory windows, as has been explained already (v. p. 99), and the church is consequently very dark. There is no CH. XXH] FRANCE BURGUNDY 109 Fig. 96. no FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Autun ambulatory, or chevet of chapels, but the church finishes like a basilica with three simple apses at the ends of the choir and its aisles. There are shallow transepts and a central tower over the crossing. Portal and At the west end is one of the fine porches (Fig. 97) poich characteristic of Burgundy, but instead of being enclosed like the narthex at Cluny and that still existing at Vezelay the front stands open with arches to the street, a difference which expresses that between Cluny and Vezelay which were regular establishments, and Autun which was a cathedral and secular. The narthex has a central nave and an aisle on each side like the others ; all are vaulted, the nave with a semi-circular barrel vault on transverse ribs that spring from attached columns. Under this porch or narthex a magnificent flight of steps reaching from side to side rises with dignity to the portals of the church 1 . The central doorway resembles the great portal of Ve"zelay. The tympanum contains a figure of our Lord in a vesica which is held up rather ungracefully by two angels at the foot, and two more flying upside down at the head. The scene is the resurrection ; angels are blowing the last trump ; other angels are receiving the blessed spirits ; Michael weighs them in a balance, and devils are carrying off the damned, and thrusting them into the mouth of hell. A similar division of the good and the bad is going on below in a string of little figures along the lintel. A series of texts in Leonine Hexameters on the upper margin of the lintel is interrupted in the middle by the words : GISIfBERTVS nOC FECIT 1 Mr Hamerton says the steps are modern, and that before they were made the ascent was by a slope of bare earth. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY in Fig. 97. ii2 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Autun Of the including orders in the arch, one has a scroll, and the other little circles as at Vezelay with signs of the Zodiac and other figures in them. The columns in the jambs are diapered and scaled, and carry " storied " capitals, and the central pier, like that at Ve"zelay, has columns and capitals below, and figures above, in this case a bishop supported by two angels. The The sculpture at Autun does not appear to be by the sculpture game ^^ as ^^ at Vezelay, and Gislebert, or Gilbert seems to have reverted somewhat more closely to the Byzantine style in his finely folded and convoluted draperies. The figures at Autun are even more attenuated and drawn out than those at Vezelay, some of the angels being between 10 and n heads high. The bishop on the central pillar is in a more advanced style, but the whole of this pier seems modern, and though it no doubt preserves generally the original design one cannot base any argument on its technique. s. jean, The interesting church of S. JEAN at AUTUN observes the Roman tradition in its fluted pilasters, and Corinthian- izing capitals, but it has taken a step in advance of the cathedral in its vault, which is cross-groined, so as to allow of large side windows. The church is cruciform, and has no aisles. There are strong transverse ribs carried curiously by short colonnettes bracketed out from the wall pier (Fig. 98), which consequently projects considerably into the church, and helps the abutment. There are no diagonal ribs, and the bay being much shorter from E. to W. than from N. to S. the cross vault has to ramp up like those at Vezelay. The apse is vaulted with radiating ribs between which the panels are arched. Valence At VALENCE the construction of the cathedral is dif- ferent (Fig. 99). The nave has a barrel vault with strong CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY Fig. 98. J. A. II. n 4 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Valence transverse ribs springing from semi-circular shafts attached cathedral ^ ^ e ^^ ^ a square pier. Similar half columns are attached to the other three sides and carry the round arches of the nave and that across the aisle. There is neither triforium nor clerestory ; for the aisles, which are cross- groined, are nearly as high as the nave, the vault of which springs from the level of the crown of the aisle arch. Consequently the great vault of the nave is well abutted by those of the aisles. The light is given by large round-headed windows in the upper part of the aisle walls, with jamb shafts in reveals at the sides. The construction has a certain resemblance to that of some churches in distant Aquitaine, such as that of S. Savin (v. sup. Plate CII). The church is cruciform, with unusually long transepts, and in this district one is surprised to find over the crossing a flattish dome on regular pendentives, another Aquitanian feature. The span of the nave is 28 ft. from centre to centre of the columns, that of the aisles 14; and there are eight bays west of the crossing, which gives the usual basilican proportion, the nave being twice as wide as the aisles, and four times as long as it is wide. The apse has a semi-dome and is surrounded by a cross-groined ambulatory with four projecting semi-circular chapels. These are buttressed outside by square piers with Corinthianizing capitals like those of the nave pillars. All the windows are round-arched, some with coloured voussoirs, and in the blank arcades occurs the horseshoe trefoil of Auvergne and Le Puy. Throughout this in- teresting church Roman tradition runs strongly. ** * s a PP arent a ^ so m th 6 fluted pilasters and other features of the cathedral of S. MAURICE at VIENNE, a town rich in Roman remains. The desecrated church of CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY VALENCE CATH< /\ Fig. 99. n6 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn S. PIERRE, now the museum, was once a Roman hall which was divided into nave and aisles by two walls pierced with arches on plain square piers. At the end, built against the Roman wall and pediment, is a fine Romanesque tower (Plate CXV), once preceded by further buildings now nearly obliterated. The tower is oblong, having three windows in front and two at the sides. Over those of the top stage but one are the horse- shoe trefoiled arches that have been noticed at Valence and will be noticed at Le Puy and in the churches of Auvergne. A plain tiled roof now forms the covering, and the termination originally intended is a matter for conjecture. Among other Burgundian towers there is a good one at Vezelay attached to the south transept, and of the two that originally flanked the west front, one still retains its original upper part, though it has been a good deal spoiled by modern work. At SAULIEU is a fine though imperfect tower, rather later, and with pointed arches. Abbey of At LYONS, the centre of the old Burgundian kingdom, Lyons' though the church of Bishop Patiens, which Sidonius Apollinaris celebrated in an ode, cannot now be traced, there remains in the church of the abbey of AINAY (Fig. 100) a building of considerable interest, dating from the loth and nth centuries but much altered in subsequent ages. The plan is basilican and cruciform, with barrel-vaulted nave and aisles under the same roof. The columns are cylindrical with capitals of a rude Corinthianizing character. At the east end are three apses corresponding to the nave and aisles and covered with semi-domes. There are two towers, one over the crossing, low and square, carried on four great granite columns which are Plate CXV S. P1ERRE-VIENNE CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 117 Fig. 100. form. This seems to be a Burgundian feature, occurring also at Guebviller and in a more elaborate form at Itomes, two churches illustrated by Viollet-le-Duc 1 and I found it in the mountain valleys of Dauphine" at Monestier and in other village churches in the passes leading to Italy. The four granite columns in the interior may perhaps be some of the Fulmenta Aquitanica superba of which Sidonius sings (v. sup. p. 31). There is a western gallery over the porch, opening 1 V.-le-Duc, ill. 315, 317; IV. 453. Abbey of Ainay, antiques cut short, and covering an octagonal dome resting on squinches with round-arched arcading like Lyons those at Le Puy. The top stage has round arched openings with coupled colonnettes, and finishes with a corbel table and cornice. The other tower is at the west end and has a low pyramidal spire, and at the angles, by way of pinnacles, four curious "antefixae" or horns, consisting of the fourth part of a pyramid or cone, like those at the angles of a Roman sarcophagus, which probably suggested their n8 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn to the nave. The transepts are shallow and do not project beyond the aisles. Outside the south wall of that Chapel of on the south side is the chapel of S. Blandina which dates probably from the end of the loth century, but has S. Blan- dina, Lyons mCHAfEJL of JSTJBLANDINA.LVONS Fig. 101. been so much restored as to have lost its authenticity in a great measure. It consists of a barrel- vaulted nave ending in an apse, raised on four steps, with a crypt below, covered with a cross-groined vault and perfectly CH. XXH] FRANCE BURGUNDY 119 plain. The apse is square but has a semi-dome, the corners of the square being curiously cut off by curved arches carried on small columns. The capitals of these columns have escaped restoration and are very typical of their period (Fig. 101). The cathedral of S. BENIGNE at DIJON still retains the Dijon, crypt or lower storey of a curious round chapel originally attached to the east end of a basilica which preceded the present Gothic building. All the upper part of the rotunda was destroyed in 1792, but plans, sections, and elevations of the complete building have fortunately been preserved in Plancher's Histoire gdndrale et particuliere de jBourgogne, published in 1739, when the edifice was intact. At the extreme east end still remains a very early building of the 6th century with a crypt and two storeys over it. The church of the same date to which this adjoined was re-built at the opening of the nth cen- tury by Abbot William of Volpiano in Lombardy, and dedicated in 1018. His building was a basilica ending with three apses, and between these apses and the 6th century chapel he constructed the round church which has been mentioned, to contain the tomb of S. Benigne, of which the crypt alone remains (Fig. 102). It consists of two concentric aisles surrounding a central space, the diameters of the three circles being approxi- mately 20, 40, and 60 ft. respectively 1 . Over the circumambient aisles were two other storeys like them, the lower at the floor level of the church, the upper at that of the triforium. Eight columns surround the middle area, carrying round arches and forming an octagon, and sixteen carry the outer arcade "between the aisles. The 1 The dimensions are given as S'Qom., i2'iom., i8'3om. Rivoira, vol. n. p. 6. 120 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn Fig. 102 (V.-le-Duc). CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 121 central space was originally open to the sky ; a barrel Dijon, . , j i S.Benigne vault covered the next ring, and a vault part barrel and part cross-groined the outer one. In the upper storey the outer ring of columns was omitted, but that round the central area ran up as an octagonal tower, against which an annular quadrant vault springing from the outer wall abutted. In later times a lantern seems to have been placed over the central opening. Two massive round towers projecting from the north and south sides contained winding staircases communicating with all three storeys. It is curious that Abbot William's rotunda seems to have been imitated at Canterbury. About 30 years after the dedication of S. Augustine's Abbot Wilfric returned from France, where he may have seen the church at Dijon, and at the end of his basilica connecting it with an existing Lady Chapel, he too built a round chapel of which the foundations were laid bare in 1915. The monks however found it inconvenient, and though the county of Kent rejoiced in its beauty it was pulled down in loSo 1 . The design of Abbot William's work is rude in the Rudeness extreme. The arches are cut square through the wall work without any moulding, and the capitals of the mono- cylindrical pillars are mere cubes of stone with the four angles chamfered from square above to octagon below. The few faint attempts at sculpture are barbarous and infantile. Towards the west, where re-construction took place after the central tower of the basilica fell in 1096, causing considerable damage to the adjacent parts, the sculptor has attempted something more ambitious but with lamentable results. The architectural design how- 1 Letabatur novo opere Cantia quamquam monastice habitationi in- congruum fecisset artificum imperitia. See account and plans in Archaeologia, vol. LXVI. 122 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn ever is far ahead of the decorative work, and displays great originality. When perfect, this rotunda, in spite of its barbarous detail, must have been a very striking and interesting monument, and its construction which lasted wmiam of for nearly eight centuries was daring and successful. Its architect Abbot William was an Italian of Swabian descent on his father's side, but his mother was of a noble Italian family. He entered the abbey of Cluny under Abbot Maiolus, and was made Abbot of S. Benigne about 990. Two lives of him, which have been preserved 1 , bear witness to his activity in opening schools for poor clerks, seeing that not only in Burgundy but throughout all France they were deficient in knowledge of chanting and reading. His energy in building was not less than his zeal for education. Finding the church of S. Benigne past repair he took that as a divine call to re-build it. Bishop Bruno of Langres found the means, and collected columns of marble and stone from all about, probably despoiling older structures, and Abbot William brought master craftsmen, and himself directed the work 2 . Scholars, craftsmen of various trades, and skilled husbandmen flocked to him in great numbers from his native Italy 3 by whose art and genius we are told the place profited much. He died at Fecamp in Normandy, in which connexion we shall hear of him again. Round It is generally said that these round churches, whether built over a tomb, like this one at Dijon over the tomb of S. Benigne, or over a cenotaph like that at Neuvy 1 Mabillon, Acta Sanctorum ordinis Sancti Benedict!, vol. VI. part I. p. 286. 2 Reverendus abbas magistros conducendo et ipsum opus dictando. Cronaca S. Benigni Divionensis, D'Achery, Spicilegium, II. p. 381. 3 Item : Coeperunt denique ex sua patria, hoc est Italia, multi ad eum convenire : aliqui literis bene eruditi, alii diversorum operum magisterio docti, alii agriculturae scientia praediti. Quorum ars et ingenium huic loco profuit plurimum. Ibid. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 123 S, Sepulchre which enclosed a model of the tomb at Round Jerusalem, or like the Templars' churches with an obvious reference to the object of their order, were imitated from the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The rotunda there Church of was originally open to the sky in the centre, and was Sepulchre surrounded like that at S. Benigne with concentric aisles, and Viollet-le-Duc points out the resemblance between the two which suggests imitation 1 . Sigr. Rivoira on the other hand who writes with the object of minimising the influence of the East on the architecture of the West during the Romanesque period, thinks the suggestion came rather from the domed mausolea of Roman work such as that of the Princess Constantia which was built between 326 and 329, and that of the Empress Helena. Neither of these however had an open eye in the centre of the dome, though S. Costanza has the annular vaulted aisle which occurs at Dijon. He says that the fashion of rotundas with cupolas and annular vaults was imported from Rome to the East, and not as some suppose from the East to the West 2 . However this may be it would not follow that the rotunda at Jerusalem was not taken as the model for S. Benigne and other round churches in the west of Europe in the nth century because it was itself based upon western examples of the 4th. Of Neuvy S. Sepulchre it is expressly recorded that it was built " ad formam S. Sepulchri Jerosolimitani*" It was from the workshops of Cluny that architecture The made a fresh start in France. But independently of the shelter afforded by the cloister to the peaceful arts the Burgundians themselves seem to have had a natural turn for the manual crafts. The Byzantine historian of the 1 V.-le-Duc, vni. 283. 2 Rivoira, Origini, etc. vol. II. p. 32. 3 Archives des monuments historiques, cited V.-le-Duc, vm. 283. i2 4 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn 5th century says of them that " they lead an easy life all their time. For they are nearly all of them craftsmen, and subsist on the wages they get thereby 1 ." Under the protection of the Church their native bent for the arts found full scope for its efforts, and a school of architecture was founded of which the influence spread far and wide wherever the Cluniac order extended itself. At the end of the 1 2th century architecture ceased to be in the hands of the clergy and passed into those of laymen in France, as it had done long before in Italy, but till Th? then the Cloister was the centre of all progress in the the refuge civil arts and in the spread of knowledge. Hallam, while condemning superstition and other evils that attached to the monastic system, says 2 , "we can hardly regret in reflecting on the desolating violence which prevailed that there should have been some green spots in the wilderness where the feeble and the persecuted could find refuge. How must this right have enhanced the veneration for religious institutions ! How gladly must the victims of internal warfare have turned their eyes from the baronial castle, the dread and scourge of the neighbourhood, to those venerable walls within which not even the clamour of arms could be heard to disturb the chant of holy men and the sacred service of the altar ! " The regular clergy Foreign conducted schools in which were taught letters, philosophy, of fl cny theology, such science as the age possessed, and the arts. From this centre masters of the various crafts issued forth to carry them into other places. In 1009, before the great church of Cluny was built, Abbot Hugh the 1 t6vos e'ort ftdpfiapov irepav TOV irorafjiov 'Pjjvou fx ov T7 ? v oiifijcriv, Bovp- yovvia>vfs KaAotirat. Otroi fiiov air pdyfiova {wo-iv dti TtKToves yap axfdov irdvTes fla-iv, KOI fit ravrrjs fjna-dov XapfidvovrfS dirorpe^ovrai. Socr. Hist. Eccl. VII. C. 30. 2 Middle Ages, chap. IX. part I. CH. xxn] FRANCE BURGUNDY 125 Venerable sent out a disciple Jean de Farfa with instruc- tions and a specification for the buildings of the monastery in his native place. " The church was to be 140 feet long with 1 60 windows, glazed ; to have two towers at the entrance, forming a parvise for the laity ; the dormitory was to be 140 feet long, 34 high 1 , with 92 glazed windows each over 6 feet high by 2\ wide ; the refectory was to by 90 feet long and 23 high, the almonry 60 feet long, the workshops of the glaziers, jewellers, and goldsmiths 125 feet long by 25 wide ; the stables for the monastery and for guests 280 feet long by 25 2 ." The ample provision made for workshops shows how Convent . , r , , , r workshops vital a part of the conventual system the crafts were considered in the nth and i2th centuries, and how they were practised and developed within the protection of the cloister side by side with the literary labours which have given us the splendidly written manuscripts and illuminations of those centuries. The Cistercians were not behind the Cluniacs in the The . Cistercians matter of architecture, though one can always recognize one of their churches by its severity and restraint of ornament. In subduing the decoration they followed, at all events at first, the rigid rule of S. Bernard ; and this had the effect of retarding the progress of Romanesque architecture during the latter part of its course, so long as its practice was confined to clerical hands. Monastic architecture as stagnation time went on lost the life and freshness of its earlier asticarchi- stages, and tended to become stereotyped. Long after in lay hands the art had begun to develop new forms, and to employ novel principles of construction the monastic buildings bore a conservative character, and lagged behind 1 This must have included in the height a ground storey below. 2 L'Abb Cucherat, Cluny an XI stecle, cited V.-le-Duc, 1. 125. 126 FRANCE BURGUNDY [CH. xxn those that were being raised by the new schools that arose outside the Cloister. Materiaiin Burgundy, besides the natural capacity of its people Burgundy f Qf ^ ar ^ an( j ^ powerful influence of the great regular establishments which fostered their efforts, pos- sessed also great advantages in the splendid stone that was quarried there. Nowhere perhaps did the crafts of masonry reach higher perfection than there and in the bordering province of Champagne, during the succeeding s. Urbain period of the Gothic style. In the church of S. URBAIN at TROVES we have a miracle of masonry. Every part of the construction shows complete knowledge of the strength of the material and exact appreciation of the task imposed upon it. The supports are reduced to a minimum, and seem scarcely equal to their work. To an artist's eye the work looks thin and wiry : it seems as if science were getting ahead of art, and the design savours more of engineering than of architecture. Wonder- ful as it is, fuller satisfaction may I think be got out of the massive work of the Burgundian Romanesque where there is a more generous allowance of material and more obvious sufficiency of support, even if it be often super- fluous. And in the quaint imaginings of the storied capitals, amid which the fancy of the carver ran riot, and in the strange stiff sculptures of the tympana to which archaicism seems to lend a mystery, one finds something more interesting and even more sympathetic than in the brisk caps a crochet, and the more facile sculptures of the later Gothic at the end of the i3th and in the i4th centuries, by the side of which the earlier sculptures betray, it must be admitted, a spice of barbarism. CHAPTER XXIII AUVERGNE THE county of Auvergne, with Clermont for its capital, till the middle of the loth century recognized the Duchy of Aquitaine as its feudal superior, and after that the Counts of Toulouse got possession of it. In the early part of the I2th century however the Counts of Auvergne again did homage to Guienne 1 . The political connexion with these different powers at different times explains to some extent the architecture of the province, which at Le Puy seems influenced by the domes of Aquitaine, and in the decorations of Notre Dame du Port at Clermont, and the group of buildings belonging to the same class, appears to be affected by the traditions of the south. The architecture of the province however has a The strong individuality, and the churches of Auvergne may be said to have a style of their own. The best known examples are those of Notre Dame du Port at Clermont-Ferrand, Issoire, S. Nectaire, and Brioude, all of which except the last named, which is rather later, date from the beginning of the 1 2th century. The plan is cruciform, but the management of the crossing is singular, and very beautifully contrived. The ground plan (Figs. 104, 105) does not suggest the pecu- liarity of the upper part, for the deep transepts instead of 1 Hallam, Middle Ages, chap. I. 128 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 129 rising in the usual way for their whole extent to the same The ,.P , j i_ V i L Auvergnat height as the nave and choir, have only their inner part, transept corresponding to the nave aisles, carried up, while so much of the transept as projects beyond the aisles is kept lower (Fig. 103 B). All four arms of the building are covered with barrel vaults which are stopped at the central crossing by a tower and cupola. This is not constructed as a true dome, but an octagon is formed by squinch arches, and carried up as an octagonal tower to a considerable height, where it finishes with a pyramidal roof. This break in the height of the transept is an admirable contrivance for setting off the central tower and spire to the best advantage. It escapes the fault of appearing to bury the tower between converging roofs, and also that of seeming to carry the tower on the roof itself. Instead of this the short high transept, not much wider than the tower, seems to afford it a good broad base to stand upon, and to form a sort of shoulder to support it, which it does with a very dignified effect. At the same time the floor space is not affected or diminished by the unequal height of the transept roof, and an opportunity is afforded for windows to light the central part of the church. The central tower is supported on four great arches which are steadied by the barrel vaults of the nave and choir on two sides, and on the other two by half-barrel vaults over the raised parts of the transept, which pitch against it (Fig. 103 B). These half-barrels in their turn have their thrust resisted by barrel vaults running cross- ways to them over the lower part of the transept. The barrel vault of the nave is supported by a Construc- continuous half-barrel vault over the triforium of the aisles (Fig. 103 A), the aisle below being cross-vaulted. J. A. II. 9 J3 o FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm The The strength of this construction consequently depends jivergnat ent j re jy Qn tne stability of the outer walls, which are struction vQr y g^g^y buttressed, but are very massive, and as they have proved effective the construction may be pronounced to be in perfect equilibrium. On these vaults the roof is laid directly, without any timber construction such as was required when the art of cross-vaulting with rib and panel was perfected. The barrel vault, especially when pointed as it was in later examples, could easily be covered with a gabled roof. In Constantinople and the East the curved back of the vault would have been allowed to show itself, as it does in the smaller temple of Diocletian's palace at Spalato, and the lead or tiling would have been laid on the back of the arch, but this fashion never obtained in western Europe, where the gabled roof is universal, its defects The drawback to this mode of construction is that the half-barrel vaults over the triforium, in order to abut the great central one over the nave, had to pitch against it at such a height as to make a clerestory impossible ; and the only light the church could receive was by the lower windows in the aisles, those at the east and west ends, and what little stole in through small windows at the back of the triforium. Poly- Another striking feature of these Auvergnat churches masonry is the polychrome masonry with which they are decorated (Plate CXVI). Situated as they are among the extinct volcanoes of the Puy de Dome, the black basaltic rock of the district is used as a freestone in their construction ; and advantage is taken of this to mix it with yellowish white stone in mosaic patterns on the exterior walls. Not only are the arches made with black and white voussoirs alternately, but the gables, and the spandrils of Plate CXI' I "'.-? * &&*?&& ?.. a f - ' v.a:,-.n .r.r r r- r-.T ^~ s,.-^ i ' i W-*- r- r - . . 'iP- BRIOUDE Plate CXVII NOTRE DAME DU PORT- CLERMONT-FERRAND CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 131 the arches are faced with mosaic in geometrical figures, not unlike those at the Byzantine palace of Constantine Porphyrogenitus (Plate XXIII, vol. i. p. 140), and a fine wide frieze of it is carried round the main apse below the cornice. In the little chapel of S. Michel, which crowns s. Michel so picturesquely its needle of rock at Le Puy, little bits of r Aiguille white marble are introduced with good effect among the patterns of black and yellow. This form of decoration seems to suggest an oriental origin, for mosaic was dis- tinctly a Byzantine art to begin with. As the fashion for polychrome masonry did not spread in France, nor indeed did it continue even in this district, one may imagine it the result of some fortunate visit to the Auvergne of a Greek or Venetian, to whom the sight of mosaic was familiar, and who, struck with the possibilities of so unusual a material Poiy- as the black basalt, conceived the happy idea of contrasting masonry it in patterns with lighter stone. The Auvergnats did not abandoned persevere in the kind of design so happily begun, and the later cathedral at Clermont is built entirely of basalt without any relief, and with a dismal effect of colour. Except to a certain extent at Vezelay I know no other instance of polychrome masonry in France, and in that respect English architecture is perhaps richer than French. There is a strong classic feeling in the cornices of classic the exterior of these churches, which have a considerable Auvergne projection and are carried on regular modillions. These, at Notre Dame du Port, are queerly fashioned as if they had been of wood, and the carpenter had begun to sink the sides, leaving a bracket in the middle, but had left off before cutting out the curled shavings resulting from the 'operation of his chisel. Some such incident of the workshop probably suggested the design. This fancy 9-2 132 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm Notre Dame du Port, Clermont however is not peculiar to Auvergne. Corbels with these curious curled sides occur in the cornice of the church of S. Radegond in the outskirts of Tours, and in that of the ancient baptistery of S. Leonard near Limoges. The church of NOTRE DAME DU PORT, at CLER- MONT-FERRAND, is the best known example of these Auvergnat buildings, and exhibits all the local pecu- liarities that have been mentioned. It is cruciform, and the transepts are broken in height to form the shoulder or base for the tower over the crossing 1 , which contains an octagonal dome on squinches (Fig. 104). The nave NOTRE DAM BU POKT OLEKMONT Fig. 104 (V.-le-Duc). has a barrel vault ; the arches are plain and square in section without mouldings, and the piers are square with an attached shaft on all four sides, of which that towards the nave runs up as if to carry a transverse arch which however is wanting. The aisles are lofty and are cross- groined with transverse ribs from each pier to attached wall-shafts. The triforium is covered with the half- barrel, or quadrant vault described above ; small slits give it light, and it opens to the nave with triple arcading of 1 This tower is a modern restoration, though a very satisfactory one. I have seen an old print which shows nothing above the roofs of nave and transepts but a small wooden belfry. CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 133 columns carrying the horse-shoe trefoiled arches which are Notre a characteristic of Auvergne and Burgundy. Port The apse is barrel-vaulted with a semi-dome, and has a chevet with an ambulatory which is cross-groined with- out transverse ribs. Four semi-circular chapels project from this, the central bay eastwards having a window instead of the usual chapel. This arrangement occurs also at the church of Chamalieres on the way to Royat. There is a crypt below the choir with a double descent, and at the west end is a gallery over a vaulted porch, opening to the nave and aisle, which also is a favourite feature of the Auvergnat plan. All the capitals are carved with figures of sacred The subjects, both inside and out of the church 1 . The south door (Plate C XVI 1 1) is beautiful, and very characteristic of the style. The pedimental lintel reminds one of some of the Byzantine doorheads, such as that of Bishop Handegis at Pola. In the centre of it is carved a conventional temple with altar and hanging lamp ; next to it on one side is a group of the Presentation, and beyond it the Baptism with angels holding towels. On the other side is the Virgin with the Infant Saviour, to whom the three Magi approach with offerings. Inscrip- tions in hexameter verse describe the subjects. Above under a horseshoe arch is a seated figure of our Lord between two six winged Seraphs recalling those in the mosaics at S. Sophia. Right and left of the door are single figures on brackets under a hood, but not niched into the wall, and above are two groups of small figures, one of which is much perished. The sculpture on the lintel is very deeply cut, and sunk in the solid : the other figures are planted on the 1 v. Illustrations in the Muste du Trocadero, Plates 181, 330, 332. 134 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm Notre Dame du Port Issoire face of the wall in- a manner typical of the style. The wall has been much restored but the figures are not touched, and it would seem they are in their original position. The side walls are arcaded outside, and studded in the head of the arches with sections of basaltic columns. The east end is more richly decorated with rough mosaic work in lava and white stone than any other church of this Auvergnat style (Plate CXVII). The church at ISSOIRE (Fig. 105) is the largest of the Fig. 105. group, but the description of the construction at Notre Dame du Port will apply almost word for word to this building also. The nave is lofty and barrel vaulted, the piers are square with attached shafts, of which that on the nave side runs up, but there is no transverse rib to rest on it. There is a western tower, and a gallery over a porch across the front ; the transept is of two heights, and over the crossing is an octagonal dome on squinches, but here it is little more than a square with the corners taken off. The choir as at Clermont and Brioude is lower Plate CXVIII NOTRE DAME DU PORT CLERMONT-FERRAND Plate CXIX S. NECTAIRE CH. xxin] FRANCE AUVERGNE 135 than the nave, which allows the central tower to be well issoire seen. The four arches of this tower are adapted to the height of the choir and not that of the nave, so that over them on all four sides is room for a triple arch, that on the east being a window while the others are open arcades looking into nave and transepts. The nave has a triforium with horseshoe trefoiled arches, and the upper part is very dark. In one respect Issoire differs from Clermont: it has a chapel at the east end of the chevet, instead of a window. This central chapel is square unlike the other four which are semicircular. Rude sculptures are dotted about the exterior walls, and the capitals are storied as at Notre Dame du Port. S. NECTAIRE (Fig. 106) has the smallest church of s.Nectaire this group. It is situated on a lofty rock in scenery that is almost Alpine, and is reached by a drive of about two and a half hours from Issoire, through a fine country. The construction here is exactly like those already de- scribed, with barrel vaults to nave, quadrant vault over triforium, cross-vaulted aisles, west gallery opening by arches over a porch into nave and aisle, chevet with ambulatory, semi-circular chapels, and exterior mosaic, and a central tower with dome. A single roof as usual covers both nave and aisles in an unbroken slope. Here however instead of compound piers the nave has cylindrical columns, with simple Corinthianizing capitals, and the storied capitals are confined to the east end. There are two towers at the west end which give this church an individual character among its fellows. On the whole the interior of S. Nectaire struck me as the most pleasing of all these Auvergnat churches (Plate CXIX). BRIOUDE (Plate CXVI, sup. p. 130) is the latest of the 136 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm Fig. 1 06. CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 137 group in date, and has not only suffered a good deal of renovation in modern times like the rest, but was also a good deal pulled about in the i4th century, when the nave was ceiled with rib and panel vaulting. Two bays of the nave next the crossing remain in their original state : one has three blank arches where the triforium should be, and a circle above ; and if this is original it would have prevented a barrel vault. The other bays have a clerestory into which Gothic traceries are inserted. The central tower over the crossing rests on four pointed arches, and is open as a lantern to the floor. The transepts do not outrun the aisles, and are vaulted in two heights, forming a gallery, with a barrel vault above and a cross-groined vault below constructed in ashlar. There is a western tower as at Issoire, and a porch and gallery at the west end. On the south side is a fine porch of simple design. The capitals are mostly Corinthian izing, but some are storied, and some of the pilasters are fluted, which is not common in Auvergne. The advanced style of this church appears in the windows, which instead of the plain round-headed openings of Clermont have two orders of shafts and arches. The west front is very plain and simple, and this is Simplicity characteristic of all these Auvergnat churches, in which vergnat the attention of the architect seems to have been chiefly fafad bestowed on the eastern end with its chapels, and the central tower. The little church ot CHAMALIERES, in a village now chama- joined by lines of houses to Clermont, has escaped re- storation, but is in a sadly dilapidated condition, and a good deal hidden by houses built up against it. It has an ambulatory and four apsidal chapels, with an east 138 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm window in the centre. The nave has the original barrel vault, but the choir has rib and panel vaulting and flying buttresses. Three arches at the west end open into what may have been a porch or narthex as at Notre Dame du Port and the other churches like it, but at present there is no exit and the church is entered by a side door. In other respects the building conforms to the Auvergnat type. s.Satumin At S. SATURNIN, as shown by a photograph, for I have not seen it, is a church with central tower, transepts, an apse inlaid with mosaic, and an ambulatory, in all respects like the other churches that have been described, except that there are no apsidal chapels attached to the ambulatory aisle. Royat The church at ROYAT is peculiar. It is cruciform, square ended, single aisled, and barrel vaulted. The choir is raised by nine steps above a vaulted crypt. There is a central tower, square, surmounted by an octagonal stage carried on squinches. The east end has a triplet of round-headed windows and above them a cusped sex-foil circle of the I3th century. Fortified The outside of the building is regularly fortified like a castle with parapet and machicolations, and on the south side is a castle yard or bailey. The crypt is extremely interesting. It consists of three aisles four bays long, cross-groined without ribs, and the columns have capitals of an early type. Le Puy The cathedral of LE PUY, as has been said above, has characteristics of the styles both of Auvergne and Aquitaine. To the influence of the latter school belongs the domical construction of the nave which has been described in a former chapter. To that of the former may be traced the polychrome decoration of the masonry Plate CXX LE PUY CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 139 which forms so important a part of the design, both of the exterior and interior. The cloister at Le Puy on the north side of the nave Cloister, (Plate CXX) is one of the most charming in France, though it has suffered a good deal from the severe restoration of M. Mallay. It is not all of one date, the southern walk next the church being the oldest, and dating according to Viollet-le-Duc from the loth century; the other three were re-built in the i2th, that on the west side being the latest. The columns are diminished in the classic fashion, and carry round arches of three orders in the earlier walks, the middle order in the later arcades being replaced" by a singular band of ornament like an exaggerated bead and reel. The voussoirs are of black basalt and white stone alternately, and the spandrils are filled with a rough mosaic of basalt and red brick in various patterns. Above, is a cornice delicately carved with scrolls, heads, and figures of men and animals, that in the older walks being simpler than the others. The keystones of the outer order of the arch are orna- mented with little figures, among which is a mermaid, holding her tail in her hand. The cloister is covered with plain cross-groining. The capitals are rude and distant copies of Roman Corinthian, and in the earlier part have the leaves raffled in the Roman fashion with distinct pipings. In the decoration by polychrome masonry however one may suspect a trace of Byzantine influence, and both here and in the church are capitals with a curious resemblance to some we have described at Ravenna and Salonica. A capital in the north transept (Fig. 107) follows, though at an immense distance, the construction of one at S. Demetrius in Salonica (Plate VIII) with the selfsame convex band 140 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm Fig. 108. Plate CXX1 South Porch LE PUY Plate CXXII Capitals of South Porch LE PUY CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 141 of scroll work below the stage of the volutes ; and in a capital from the cloister at Le Puy (Fig. 108) with its Byzantinesque birds dipping into a cup, and its leaves thrown sideways, is it too fanciful to detect a suggestion from the blown leaf capitals of S. Apollinare in Classe at Ravenna, and those in S. Demetrius and S. Sophia at Salonica ? (Plate III, vol. I. p. 52). One of the most remarkable features of this church is Le Puy, the south porch, with its singular detached ribs within ^Jch the true arches of the construction (Plate CXXI). They spring from columns, like themselves detached from the main jambs. The capitals of these columns and of the whole group of shafts carrying the arches are very strange, and unlike any other French examples known to me, and in their semi-barbarous richness remind one of Indian work rather than that of any other school (Plate CXXI I). Some of the shafts are fluted, others are covered with small reticulations of sunk chequer- work, and one resembles on a huge scale the ornament that has been noticed in the cloister like an exaggerated version of the classic bead and reel. Close by this porch is the great campanile (Plate The CXXI 1 1), which dates from the end of the nth century. campanile It is built mainly of the lava of the district, and is remarkable for its extreme diminution as it rises storey by storey. This is managed by four interior pillars which rise through all the stages till they take the reduced structure of the upper part, so that it has no false bearing. These pillars are steadied by being united to the outer walls with arches and vaults forming galleries round the interior of the tower. It has in the upper part the same steeply pedimented windows which occur in the steeple of Brantome near Perigueux, and those of 142 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm S. Leonard and S. Junien in Aquitaine, and which are found also in the steeple of Vendome and the old steeple at Chartres, farther north. Lower down in the tower are windows with the horse-shoe trefoil heads which occur at Notre Dame du Port, Issoire, and the other Auvergnat churches, and are to be seen farther east at Vienne and Valence in Burgundy. Fig. 109. Distinct as the schools of these several provinces are in the main, they nevertheless overlap in minor details such as these. Another instance of it is afforded by the steeple of Uzerche (Correze) in Aquitaine, which has the high pedimented window of Brantome, Chartres, and Le Puy, and also at the corners of the square stage the horns, like those of a Roman sarcophagus, which have been noticed above at Lyons and in Dauphine 1 . 1 v. sup. p. 117. LE PUY Plate CXXIV *<* .~ ~1, /- ' S. MICHEL DE L'AIGUILLE LE PUV CH. XXIH] FRANCE AUVERGNE 143 On a wonderful pinnacle of basaltic rock (Fig. 109) s. Michel that rises in a suburb of Le Puy is perched most pic- turesquely the little church of S. MICHEL DE L' AIGUILLE, dedicated to the saint of such airy sites, which was originally founded by a dean of the cathedral about 963 \ though the present building can hardly be older than the nth or earlier part of the i2th century. Its plan is adapted to the irregular shape of the summit, which it occupies entirely, but contrives to have something like a central tower and a semi-circular aisle. A lofty tower rises at one corner. The ascent is by a long flight of steps cut in the rock, and room is found on the summit for a narrow walk round the building defended by a stone parapet. The entrance (Plate CXXIV) is by a door at the head of a steep flight of stairs under a horse-shoe trefoiled arch, and the whole of the little facade is decorated with mosaic of basalt, white stone, red brick and little bits of white marble. Grotesque beasts project on consoles, mermaids are carved on the lintel, and above is an arcaded cornice with figures in each little arch, springing from corbels which are formed of human hands. The same device occurs in the cathedral porch. The interior has tapered columns carrying capitals resembling those in the cloister, but with a stronger spice of Byzantine feeling (Figs, no, in). Some have birds 1 See Gallia Christiana, vol. II. ; Dioc. Anidensis (Le Puy), where the deed of foundation is preserved, "...quoniam ego Truannus Aniciensis ecclesiae Decanus, in quadam praealta silice quae usitata locutione vulgi Acus vocatur, prope Aniciensem urbem sita, ubi quondam vix agilium hominum erat adscensus ecclesiam collocare gestiens, etc., etc.... sic enim viam ampli itineris in praedicta silice constituens, in honore Sti Michaelis Archangeli ecclesiam intuitui cernentium gratam, Christi faventi auxilio, in Acu fundare studui." It was afterwards an Abbey : then annexed to the Cathedral and allotted to one of the Canons. 144 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm Sculpture in Au- vergne in the angles. The vaulting is of plain cross-groining without ribs (Plate CXXV). During the Romanesque period sculpture, it will have been noticed, does not play so important a part in the school of Auvergne as in those of Provence and Burgundy, or even that of Aquitaine. Examples of statuary are very rare, and the sculptor's art is confined chiefly to capitals, which are very largely carved with figure subjects, especially in the eastern part of the churches. Painted decoration appears to have been common, and Fig. no. Fig. in. there seems to have been some warranty even for the excessive modern painting at Issoire and elsewhere 1 . It was however in architecture that the Auvergnats excelled, and they developed within their province a distinct style of their own, so original and so satisfactory that one regrets the wave of Gothic architecture that came to sweep it away. In such able hands one might have imagined it would have led to some further development of surpassing interest. 1 At various times down to the I5th century the Capitular hall of Le Puy was painted with admirable frescoes, still in a great measure preserved. Plate C.V.VF S. MICHEL DE L'AIGUILLE LE PUY CH. xxm] FRANCE AUVERGNE 145 And yet the style is so complete in all its parts that Perfection one does not see an opening for anything to proceed v from it ; and in this respect it may resemble the art of style Provence, which after splendid achievement in its early days sank into stagnation and decay. At all events the Auvergnat churches are so nearly all of a date, and so very closely designed on one model, without any of those variations which appear in the successive schools of Gothic to prepare the way for a new departure in art, that it is doubtful whether the style had not played its part, and done all there was in it to do. Gothic architecture however never established itself Gothic generally in this part of France, and the great Gothic AweTgne cathedral at Clermont, comes upon one as a surprise, and seems out of place. Nor does it gain by contrast with the Romanesque of the province. After spending some weeks among the robust round-arched churches that we have been describing, one finds the Gothic of the cathedral Roman- at Clermont thin and unsatisfactory. It is undeniably a c<>thi c and fine church, though I am not sure that the west front contrasted with which Viollet-le-Duc has completed the imperfect nave is not the best part of it ; but one misses the broad simplicity, the generous solidity of column arch and wall, the grandeur of unbroken surface that gives the earlier Romanesque a dignity, and at the same time a geniality that one fails to find in the more scientific construction of the later style. One feels the same at Limoges on entering the great Gothic cathedral there after wandering among the Romanesque buildings of Poitou, the Limousin and Perigord. Indeed in these provinces and in the south of France generally one may forget Gothic, for one finds Romanesque work everywhere, and except in certain J. A. II. 10 i 4 6 FRANCE AUVERGNE [CH. xxm isolated places Gothic buildings are exceptional. And when you do come across them, if I may judge by my own experience, you will find that the stalwart Roman- esque has put you out of conceit with them. The intrusion of Gothic at Limoges causes surprise ; at Clermont it seems almost an impertinence. Here, at all events, the passage from Romanesque to Gothic is disenchanting. CHAPTER XXIV NORMANDY THE Normans were the last and most ferocious of the barbarian races who conquered and founded settlements in western Europe. Repressed with severity by Charle- magne, the Danes or Normans returned and ravaged France under his degenerate successors ; and in England after a long struggle with the Anglo-Saxons they obtained from Alfred a settlement of half his kingdom. Rollo, or Norman Gang- Roll, a fresh leader in the loth century, declining a contest with the English, invaded northern Gaul, where he committed the most disastrous ravages. Towns were pillaged, Paris itself was besieged, and churches and monasteries were rifled. Pagans themselves, the Normans paid no respect to the sanctities of the Christians ; the abbot of S. Denis was carried off and held to ransom, and had to be redeemed with 685 pounds of gold ; and the treasuries of all the abbeys were exhausted either by rapine of the Danes, or by exactions for purpose of defence. In 918 the French king, Charles the Simple, followed the example of Alfred of England, and ceded to these freebooters the province they had already conquered, requiring only an act of feudal homage for it, which was accorded with difficulty, and performed with insult 1 . 1 Jussit (Rollo) cuidam militi pedem regis osculari, qui statim regis pedem arripiens, deportavit ad os suum, standoque defixit osculum, regemque jecit supinum. Willelm : Gemmet: Hist. Normann. Lib. II. Cap. xvu. The Normans shouted with laughter, which the Franks did not venture to resent. 10 2 148 FRANCE NORMANDY [CH. xxiv Settle- Here the Normans settled down and this part of the Sormindy province of Neustria became Normandy. Rollo and his men became Christians, and with that extraordinary adaptability which was a Norman characteristic, they soon became Frenchmen, and melted into the body of the people, just as in England they became English and in Italy Italians. Of all the barbarian settlers in France the Normans who had been perhaps the most savage showed the greatest capacity for orderly government, and though they had been remarkable for their ferocity towards the priests they became in the second generation most devout Christians. The conquerors took French wives they had, says Hallam, made widows enough and their children were brought up in Christian ways, and learned the French tongue which rapidly superseded the old Norse language. With such a history it would be vain to look for any architectural remains in Normandy older than the Norman i ith century. The earlier barbarian inroads had desolated of (! the country, the buildings were probably all in ruins, and styles" 1 tne new settlers brought no art of their own from their old rude homes. But no sooner were they firmly established in their new country than they adopted the arts of the conquered race, as they did their culture, their religion, and their language ; and within a century and a half they had covered the land with buildings, both civil Energy of and religious, of unusual splendour. Viollet-le-Duc ob- buiiders serves the energy with which they pushed their enterprises to an end, so that their buildings are not left half-finished but are completed, differing in that from those of the southern races in Gaul. To all they did they imparted a distinctive character. "They found," says the same writer, " in the conquered territory remains of Carlovingian CH. xxiv] FRANCE NORMANDY 149 art, but they infused into it their national genius, positive, Norman grand, a trifle savage but nevertheless free and un- fettered 1 ." The nth century was the period of the utmost expansion of the Norman race. They had planted themselves firmly in the conquered province of France ; they had made themselves masters of Sicily and Apulia, and shaken the throne of the Eastern Empire ; and in the latter part of the century they conquered England, and became a great European power. Their peculiar style of architecture which they afterwards brought with them to England, where it almost wiped out all traces of the older Saxon work, is a fitting monument of their greatness and activity. Byzantine architecture had not made any impression Poverty of on the northern provinces of France, and the Norman remains style was based originally on Gallo- Roman examples. Provincial Roman work declined in quality as it receded farther and farther from the Capital, and the buildings which the Normans had to guide them were no doubt very inferior to those of Provence. In particular the sculpture would have been coarse and inartistic, and there would have been but little of it. The figures and ornaments found in the Roman baths at Bath are probably favourable specimens of what art could do in the northern provinces of the later empire. There was Character therefore nothing to inspire the northern architect to ornament rival the portals of Aries or S. Gilles, and figure sculpture is either wholly absent from Norman work, or if present barbarous. In decorative carving also the same sterility shows itself. There are no foliaged capitals like those of S. Trophime, or Avallon, but in the earlier Norman work only plain cushion capitals, made by squaring and 1 V.-le-Duc, vol. I. 138. 150 FRANCE NORMANDY [CH. xxiv truncating an inverted cone or hemisphere : and when in later instances attempts were made to produce sculptured capitals the result was for a long while extremely rude and inartistic. The ordinary ornament which gives a decided richness to early Norman work is purely conventional, consisting of arcadings, diapers, billets, zig-zags, rosettes, bosses, and channellings, more the work of the mason than the sculptor, but it -is used with skill and feeling, and though it cannot claim a high place in the scale of architecture it serves its purpose. influence Several writers point out the analogy between the more thJfiSrics advanced Norman ornament and the patterns of oriental stuffs. The Norman settlements in Italy and Sicily would tend to familiarize their kinsmen in the north with the products of the East ; and the trade with Venice and the Levant, which has been described in a preceding chapter, brought the fabrics of Syria and Constantinople to Poitou, Anjou, and the borders of Normandy if not into the duchy itself. On these the Norman ornaments are based, and the case was the reverse of that in Aquitaine, for instance at S. Front, where though the architecture is Byzantine the sculpture is Gallo- Roman, whereas here the architecture is Gallo-Roman while the ornament is derived from Byzantium. instruc- When the Normans had established the rule of order from S Ught an d acquired a taste for culture they sought instructors Burgundy f rom ^g more sett i ec i p arts o f France. Duke Richard I (943-996), scandalized by the dissolute life of the canons of Fecamp, invited Majolus, Abbot of Cluny, to come and reform the convent to the rule of S. Benedict. This fell through owing to the extravagant conditions required by the abbot. The next duke, Richard II (996-1027), repeated the invitation to William, Abbot CH. xxiv] FRANCE NORMANDY 151 of S. Benigne at Dijon, of whom we have heard already. Abbot William was at first afraid to go. He said "he had of Dijon understood that the Norman Dukes, men by nature cruel and savage, were more used to overthrow churches than to build them, to destroy and drive away rather than to collect and cherish congregations of spiritual men. Also the journey was long, and he had no horses or beasts of burden for transporting the brethren and their chattels." The Duke, hearing this, sent saddle horses and pack horses, and William, overcome by his perseverance, having gathered a suitable number of monks, went with them to Fecamp, where the Duke received him " as an angel from heaven, and sending away the menials, waited him- self on the godly man at table 1 ." William, as we know, was an Italian, and a great Abbot builder, and his influence was felt not only in the re- h^uen'ce 8 formation of the monastery, but in the architecture 8 . Many other religious houses were put under his rule by the Duke, among them that of Mont S. Michel which was burnt that same year 1001, and in the re-building of which Abbot William's hand may no doubt be detected. The influence of the Lombard school was thus introduced influence into this part of France, and was probably maintained Lombard under Abbot John, whom at the duke's request William scho appointed to the abbey of Fecamp, when he retired to his native Italy in his old age, for John came from the parts about Ravenna 3 . 1 Mabillon, Annates, Ord. S. Benedicti, vol. IV. p. 152. ' l His personal direction of the building of the abbey at Bernay is recorded. Haec enim auctore Guillelmo Abbate Fiscamensi...qui in locandis fundamentis non modicum praestiterat consilii auxilium. Gallia Christiana. Dioc. Lexoviensis (Lisieux). 3 Mabillon, Ada Sanctorum S. Benedicti, vol. VI. pars i. p. 302. William and his brothers founded an Abbey on their paternal estate of Volpiano in a "solitary place, four miles from the Po," "ut fructus bonorum operum quae 152 FRANCE NORMANDY [CH. xxiv In the loth century art throughout France was very rude and backward, and Normandy, the last province to become settled, was naturally the most backward of all. A letter from the abbey of Fecamp implores the monks of Dijon to send them craftsmen, of whom they had great need to enable them to finish the buildings they had begun. The earliest churches in Normandy were extremely plain. If the aisles were cross- vaulted in stone the nave was originally roofed with wood, which was not replaced by stone till a later age. The churches of MONT S. MICHEL and CERISY-LE- FORET date from the earlier part of the i ith century, and The the latter has the peculiarity of a gallery at the triforium gallery level across the transept ends, which is found also in the .cathedral of Winchester. Something like it occurs at Le Puy in Auvergne, but with a difference, and it may be regarded as especially a Norman feature. It appears s. Georges also in the fine church of S. GEORGES DE BOSCHERVILLE, chervm'e which was founded between 1050 and 1066. The archi- tecture seems too advanced in its style for so early a date, and Sign. Rivoira 1 believes it to have been re-built about 1116 in its present form, which has remained almost untouched by later work. Here, among cushion capitals, are others rudely carved with angle volutes distantly derived from ancient example, though barbarous enough in design and execution. But in the entrance to the chapter house, which is in a later style, we find human figures attenuated serving as colonnettes like those of a king and his queen at Rochester (Plate CXXVI). ibi gerunt sibi et illis esset abolitio peccatorum...Unde et Fructuariensis ille locus est vocatus " (Ibid. p. 286). Sign. Rivoira illustrates the tower of Fruttuaria which is all that remains of William's church. He returned to die at Fe"camp. 1 Rivoira, vol. II. p. 171. Plate CXXVI S. GEORGES DE BOSCHERVILLE Plate CXXVII ABBAYE AUX IIOMMES CAEN CH. xxiv] FRANCE NORMANDY 153 The abbey of JUMIEGES on the Seine was begun in 1040, and consecrated in 1065 in the presence of Duke William II, the conqueror of England. Of the original building the west front and the nave still remain. The aisles are cross-groined, but the nave was roofed with wood. The capitals are of the plain cushion type and the ornament is confined to simple billets or dentils : but in its simplicity it is a majestic piece of work. The connexion between Normandy and Lombardy Lanfranc was continued when Lanfranc of Pavia came to France and settled in the Duchy with a train of scholars and associates. In 1042 he retired to the abbey of Bee, a foundation which in him and his successor Anselm was destined to give the see of Canterbury two of its most famous prelates. A Lombard, like his predecessor Abbot William of Dijon and Fecamp, Lanfranc was a great builder, and in 1077 tne new abbey of Bee was con- Abbey secrated, with which he replaced the more modest structure of the rude Norman knight and monk Herluin. Under his rule Bee became a seat of learning famous throughout Christendom, and the arts were not neglected, as Lanfranc showed both there and afterwards when he came to England and re-built his metropolitan cathedral. We may detect his influence in the Conqueror's buildings at Caen, the two great abbeys founded by Duke William and his queen Matilda to reconcile the Pope to their marriage within the prohibited degrees. The ABBAYE AUX HOMMES, or S. 6tienne, was con- secrated in 1077, and Lanfranc was its first abbot. It has been a good deal altered in later times ; the choir Caen was re-built and the wooden roof of the nave replaced by stone vaulting in the 1 3th century, but in the lower part of the west front and in the nave arcades and triforium i 5 4 FRANCE NORMANDY [CH. xxiv Abbaye we still have the earlier work. The fagade is of the Hommes, sternest simplicity : two tiers of three wide round-headed Caen windows light the west end of the nave, which is flanked by a tower on either hand flush with it, and with similar windows below the eaves level. Above this is a storey simply decorated with plain strips of masonry carrying narrow semi-circular arches. The next two stages are in a later and more ornate style of Romanesque, dating apparently from the first quarter of the i2th century. Above rise the two splendid spires of i3th century work which are the dominating features of the town of Caen (PlateCXXVII). Progress In the interior, in spite of its abstract severity, we Norman fi nc ^ t ^ ie Norman style already advanced toward a greater style degree of refinement. The capitals are carved with some attempt at Roman example. Under the heavy spreading super-abacus which answers to the Byzantine pulvino, we find the angle volutes, the coronal of leaves, the hollow sided abacus, and a block representing the rosette of the Corinthian capital. They are carved with some skill, and are not devoid of architectural beauty and propriety. It is only when the sculptor wanders away from these foliated designs and attempts the figure of man or beast that he betrays a hopeless childishness and imbecility. Proportion The proportion of the triforium to the arcade below is different from that in any French work we have and arcade hjdjgj-to considered, for the triforium arch is as wide as that below it, and not much less in height, the lower arch being about 22 ft. high and the upper 17. This nearly equal proportion of the two storeys is one characteristic of Norman work in England, as for instance at Ely, Peterborough, Norwich, Southwell, and Winchester. It CH. xxiv] FRANCE NORMANDY 155 is significant of the Lombard connexion that there is something like the same proportion in the church of S. Ambrogio at Milan, which was finished in its present form during Lanfranc's lifetime. A somewhat similar arrangement occurs nearer home in the nave at Tournai where the triforium arches are actually larger than those of the main arcade and are surmounted by a row of small openings forming a second triforium (v. sup. Fig. 72, p. 23). The nave at S. fitienne had originally, like those of all early Norman churches, a wooden roof, but the aisles were vaulted, and the triforium is covered with a quadrant barrel vault like those of Auvergne, with an underlying transverse arch at each bay springing from an attached pilaster on the outer wall. The Norman triforium at Gloucester cathedral is covered with a similar half-barrel vault on transverse ribs. The other foundation of the Conqueror and his wife, Abba y the ABBAYE AUX DAMES, or La S. Trinite at Caen has SSnes, been more thoroughly altered than the Abbaye aux Caen Hommes, and is now mainly a i2th century building. The crypt however, which has Corinthianizing capitals like those described above, is perhaps of the original date. The church is transeptal with a central tower and at the west end two flanking towers, ancient below, but finished with an incongruous and ugly upper part. The choir is aisleless, and ends in an apse covered with a semi- dome, a feature which one is surprised to encounter so far north. Two tiers of five arches each surround the apse. They have deep soffits and are carried by detached columns with a narrow passage behind them. The capitals are rude imitations of Corinthian, and the arches are decorated with a kind of embattled fret on the lace of the outer order in the lower storey, and with i 5 6 FRANCE NORMANDY [CH. xxiv Abbaye other conventional ornaments, as well as a roll-moulding DiTmes, elsewhere. There was originally a wide round-headed window in each bay both above and below but the lower lights have been blocked. There are two bays between the apse and crossing, the lower storey a blank wall, the upper with lofty round-headed windows and a passage in the wall continued from that round the apse (Fig. 112). The bays are divided by a wide transverse rib springing from a wall shaft, and the groining is plain quadripartite without diagonal ribs. The nave has three storeys, the triforium being represented by a series of narrow openings, six in a bay, which are not very interesting, and the great arches are decorated with the embattled fret that occurs in the choir. s. Nicho- There are other Romanesque churches of interest in Caen and the neighbourhood. S. NICHOLAS is the most remarkable of them, with its curious lofty semi-cone over the apse, rising like the half-section of a steeple above the roof. s. Michel The church of S. MICHEL DE VAUCELLES in the suburbs ceiies" 1 has a beautiful tower and spire in the later style of Norman architecture, when the workmen had gained greater skill and freedom in dealing with their material and the style had begun to abate its severity (Plate CXXVIII). The belfry stage with its richly shafted and moulded windows would seem to be coeval with the upper storeys of the towers of S. foienne, while that below has the plain square sunk panelling between narrow strips of pilasters which mark the Conqueror's work on the same building. s. Contest The village of S. CONTEST, a few miles off, has a tower and spire of the same date and style, with a similar CH. xxiv] FRANCE NORMANDY 157 ABBAYE -AVX CAEN. BAY OF CHOIR. Fig. 112. 158 FRANCE NORMANDY [CH. xxiv circular stair-turret at one corner surmounted by a spirelet of its own growing out of the larger one. The The Norman style however may be studied as well styiTln" in England as in Normandy, if not better, for no sooner had the invaders settled themselves firmly on the con- quered soil than they set to work to cover the country with vast buildings on a scale not only far beyond what they found there but even greater than those they had left behind them in their own country. It is therefore unnecessary to dwell longer on the Romanesque of Normandy itself, which does not differ appreciably from that which the Normans transported to the other side of Distinctive the Channel. In either country it has a distinct character of Norman f i ts own > differing not much more widely from the Saxon work in England than from the other schools of Romanesque architecture in France. It has none of the wealth of sculpture which plays so large a part in Provence, Toulouse, and Burgundy ; it challenges none of the constructional problems solved in Aquitaine with its domes, or in Auvergne with its barrel vaults ; what little ornament it has is abstract, conventional, and restrained, and it relies for effect on a sturdy straight- forward practical mode of construction, not looking much to preceding styles for example, but working out a satisfactory result with simple means, and honest building. It is a style full of originality and pregnant with promise of a great future : and in its magnificent simplicity and ponderous majesty it gains in one way what it loses in another by comparison with styles more refined and ornate. Plate cxxrur S. MICHEL DE VAUCELLES CAEN CHAPTER XXV THE royal domain during the Romanesque period The was confined within narrow limits, though the king domain exercised a more or less shadowy supremacy over the great feudatory dukes and counts whose dominions and power exceeded his own. When Louis VI (Le Gros) came to the throne in 1108 the royal domain scarcely extended beyond the cities of Paris, Orleans, Bourges, and the adjacent districts. His territory comprised only the modern departments of Seine, Seine et Oise, Seine et Marne, Oise and Loiret 1 . The six great peers of The great France were the Count of Flanders, whose territories reached from the Scheldt to the Somme, the Count of Champagne, the Dukes of Normandy and Burgundy, the Count of Toulouse, and the Duke of Aquitaine who included in his domains Poitou, Limousin, most of Guienne and the Angoumois, and latterly Gascony. The Counts of Anjou, Ponthieu and Vermandois and others had held directly from the Carlovingian kings, but were more or less independent or had passed under other allegiance. The firmer establishment of royalty began with Louis VI. H is grandson Philip Augustus took Artois and Vermandois from the Count of Flanders, and Normandy, Maine, and Anjou from John of England. His son Louis VIII conquered Poitou and attacked Guienne ; the Albigensian 1 Guizot, Civilization in France, Lect. xin.; Hallam, Middle Ages, chap. I. i6o FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN [CH. xxv wars brought Toulouse into subjection in the 1 3th century ; the English were driven out of Guienne in 1451 ; but it was not till the latter part of the i5th century that Burgundy, Dauphine", and Provence were finally united to France by Louis XI and his son Charles VIII, who also acquired Brittany by marriage. Philip During the whole period of the Romanesque style therefore the royal domain was of very limited extent, and its boundaries bore no comparison with those of the greater feudatories. The expansion of the monarchy under Philip Augustus and his father and grandfather was marked by a corresponding expansion of the art of architecture, which brought the Romanesque style in that part of France, and before long in other parts as well, to a conclusion. The royal domain, 1'Ile de France, was the cradle of French Gothic architecture, and the reign of Philip Augustus, 1180-1223, saw the foundation of the cathedrals of Paris, Chartres, Bourges, Laon, Soissons, Meaux, Noyon, Amiens, Rouen, Cambrai, Arras, Tours, Seez, Coutances, and Bayeux, nearly all of which were finished before the close of the I3th century 1 . Scarcity of There are therefore comparatively few remains of esquework Romanesque architecture in this part of France. In France de ^ e II ^ 1 century the territory had been laid waste by The the terrible Normans, who besieged Paris and ravaged ravages the country round about, and spared neither church nor monastery. But the absence of earlier monuments is due still more to the extraordinary outburst of building which has just been referred to, which swept away all the principal churches in the older style, and replaced them by structures in the new style of the day, which 1 V.-le-Duc, Diet, Rais. I. 140. Plate CXXIX LE MANS Plate CXXX LE MANS CH. xxv] FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN 161 was worked with a passionate earnestness that excites our wonder. The BASSE QEuvRE at BEAUVAIS would seem to be the Basse nave of the cathedral, of which Bishop Herve laid the Beauvais foundation in 990, though according to some it was built originally in the 6th or 7th century, and according to Viollet- le-Duc in the 8th or 9th. It is so plain and devoid of detail that in the absence of any documentary evidence we can only say it might have been built at almost any time within those centuries. It is a basilica in plan with nave and aisles, divided by piers of plain square masonry carrying round arches which are not moulded. Each bay of the aisle and of the nave clerestory has a wide round-arched window, the voussoirs being of stone alternating with tile. The roofs were and are of wood. The front has probably been altered at a later time. Only three bays of the building remain, and they have been so extensively restored as to have lost nearly all trace of antiquity. The walls are faced with the petit appareil of Roman work. LE MANS did not strictly belong to the royal domain Le Mans when the nave was built in the nth century, but it may be taken in this connexion. It is a good example of well developed Romanesque. The west front is simple but impressive, with a round-headed doorway surmounted by a great window opening, recessed within several receding orders. The upper part is faced with reticulated masonry enriched with bands or mouldings in relief, arranged to form patterns (Plate CXXIX). The nave aisles have some very simple wall-arcading, consisting of plain round arches resting on square pilasters with no capital, but only an impost moulding at the springing 1 . The capitals of the nave columns (Plate 1 It is illustrated by V.-le-Duc, Diet. Rais. vol. I. p. 89. j. A. n. 1 1 l62 FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN [CH. xxv Le Mans Abbey ofS. Evremond The Roman- esque buttress Develop- ment of the buttress CXXX) are of a Corinthianizing character, preserving the tradition of angle and intermediate volutes, which shows that the influence of classic art was felt here very differently from what we found in Normandy, although in this part of France the remains of Roman art must have been far fewer than in the south, and of inferior execution. The same influence may be detected in the ruined abbey of S. EVREMOND (Plate CXXX I) on an island in the river at Creil, which has by way of buttresses piers with classic capitals, recalling those of the cloister at Aries, and the apses at Valence. The development of the buttress, which plays so large a part in the succeeding style of the i3th and following centuries, was only arrived at by very timid and tentative steps. The Romanesque buttress was a flat pilaster, wide but with very little projection. It was often so shallow that it was taken up to the eaves and stopped against the cornice or corbel course. Sometimes it was rounded like an attached column, thus preserving the Roman tradition of the theatre of Marcellus or the Colosseum, and the arenas of Nimes and Aries. When a greater projection was given to it the architect was evidently puzzled to know what to do with it at the top. Having the attached column still in his mind the natural thing seemed to him to be to crown it with a capital, and this is what he did with the square buttress-piers outside the cloister of S. Trophime at Aries (PI. CVII, p. 72). That however is evidently an unsatisfactory finish, for the capital, logically, is a member of support, whereas in this case it carries nothing, but is merely a sort of unmeaning finial. The next step was what we see here at S. Evremond : we have the pilaster pier, and the capital as before, but above the capital there is a sloped Q O M w c/5 Plate CXXXII S. DENIS CH. xxvj FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN 163 weathering taken back to the main wall, which clearly is a great improvement not only in appearance but in construction, for the raking weathering throws the water off, which would otherwise lie on the flat top and do harm. But the architect seems to have thought his new device wanted some sort of explanation or apology, and so, as its slope reminded him of the roof of a house, he carved it with scolloping in imitation of roof tiles. At Valence some of the buttress-piers are square and some round, but they all have the weathered top, though without the imitation of tiling. With the abbey of S. DENIS, the burying-place of Abbey of French kings from Dagobert to the Revolution, we bring the tale of Romanesque architecture in France to a close. The original church, founded or perhaps re- founded by Dagobert, fourth in descent from Clovis, about 625, was an apsidal basilica. Several worked stones and foundation walls were discovered by Viollet- le-Duc in 1859 during the restoration under his direction, which consisted to a considerable degree in undoing the injudicious repairs and false embellishments of his pre- decessors. These debris, he says, which had belonged to a Gallo- Roman edifice, " had been used in building a church of which the foundations of the apse have been found, and which must be that of Dagobert. There might still be seen, on the inside of the apse walls, traces of painting representing draperies very coarsely drawn in grey on a white ground.... Of precious marbles not the least fragment, but a construction indifferently put together, composed of debris, and covered with an ill- made coat of plaster 1 ." This Merovingian church had become ruinous in the 8th century, and was re-built 1 LEglise Abbatiale de St Denis, Vitry et Briere. 112 1 64 FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN [CH. xxv s. Denis about 750, but not completed and dedicated till 775 in the presence of Charlemagne. Though sacked by the Normans in 856 and 858, and again in 886 during the siege of Paris, when the monks had to fly for safety to Rheims, the Carolingian church lasted till the 1 2th century, being probably better built than its Merovingian pre- decessor, which it seems also to have surpassed in size and adornment. Abbot In 1 1 22 the famous Suger was elected Abbot of S. Denis. A contemporary of S. Bernard, Abelard, and Arnold of Brescia, Milman classes him in the quartette of Saint, Philosopher, Demagogue, and high Ecclesiastical Statesman which represents the age. Attached from his youth to the royal interest he became the chief counsellor of the king, and during the absence of Louis on the crusade he was for two years Regent of the kingdom. In his time, and owing partly no doubt to his wise administration, the regal authority over the great feudatories began to be something more than nominal, and grew, as M. Guizot 1 points out, to be a public power to control and regulate feudalism, in the interest of justice, and for the protection of the weak. The abbey of S. Denis became the political centre of France, and S. Bernard, alarmed at the part it played in secular affairs, wrote to reprove the abbot for his worldliness. " The abbey," he says, " is thronged not with holy recluses in continual prayer within the chapel, or on their knees within their narrow cells, but with mailed knights ; even arms were seen within the hallowed walls." Suger himself, however, practised the austerities of a monk in his own person, inhabiting a humble cell, and observing all the severe rules of the cloister. 1 Civilization in France, Lecture XIL CH. xxv] FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN 165 As soon as he became abbot he began to contemplate Sugar's the re-building of his church on a sumptuous scale worthy oT of its famous relics. Pilgrimages to adore shrines and relics were great sources of wealth to monastic communi- ties, and generally supplied the motive for re-building and enlarging the cathedrals and abbeys of the Middle Ages. The vast concourse of pilgrims to Canterbury after the murder of Becket demanded the eastward ex- tension of the cathedral to " Becket's crown." The cult of S. Swithin at Winchester brought such crowds thither that Bishop de Lucy at the beginning of the i$th century built what is practically an additional church at the east end of Walkelyn's cathedral. Abbot Suger writes that on the days when the relics were exposed the pilgrims crowded and crushed one another to get near the shrines, women shrieked, and the monks could hardly resist the pressure of the faithful or protect their treasures. To avoid this inconvenience, and to glorify the martyrs whose relics were so attractive and profitable, he re-built his church on a magnificent scale. The first stone was His new laid by King Louis VI (Le Gros) 1 and the building was church finished with such rapidity that in 1144 it was con- secrated with great pomp in the presence of Louis VII (Le Jeune). As Louis le Gros died in 1137 the re- building must have taken at least seven years, and if it was begun as some think in 1132, five years more. Even nowadays twelve years would be little enough for so great an undertaking, and for that time the speed was marvellous and, as it turned out, injudicious. 1 Ipse enim Serenissimus Rex intus descendens propriis manibus suum imposuit, hosque et multi alii tarn abbates quam religiosi viri lapides suos imposuerunt, quidam etiam gemmas ob amorem et reverentiam Jhesu Christi, decantantes " Lapides pretiosi omnes muri tui." Suger, Letter. 166 FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN [CH. xxv s. Denis Viollet-le-Duc asks "Why this haste ?" and suggests that Suger anticipated the decline of the monastic system, and felt that "the glory of the royal abbey must be renovated by some great undertaking ; that something more, and something other must be done than what the Clunisians had effected," on one hand, and that on the other hand, instead of decrying art with the Cistercians and S. Bernard, the religious orders should be in the van of progress and new ideas, and lead the way to a ** display of art hitherto unknown 1 ." its Suger's writings show the immense importance he de^gn U! attached to his building, which he wished to rival the splendour of the Eastern basilicas, with their wealth of gold, mosaic, and precious stones. But it is not only . by its scale and magnificence that S. Denis occupies a foremost place in the ranks of mediaeval buildings : it is still more remarkable as the place where the adoption of the pointed arch, and the system of Gothic construction was first shown on a grand scale. From its social and political importance the abbey of S. Denis gave a power- ful impetus to the new school which was beginning to free itself from the classic traditions of Romanesque art to which the monastic orders persistently clung. In the fa$ade (Plate CXXXII) round and pointed arches appear together, but in the construction the pointed arch gains on the other, and it may fairly be said that although pointed arches had been used elsewhere, and tentatively, it was at S. Denis that they first appeared as the ruling motive of design on a large scale. The One is naturally curious to learn what part Suger MchitSt* 1 himself had in this artistic revolution. The question may be widened to include all the famous churchmen 1 Viollet-le-Duc, Lectures on Architecture, Lect. VIL CH. xxv] FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN 167 whose names are connected with great building move- s. Denis ments that led to fresh departures in art, like Hugh of Avalon at Lincoln, and William of Wykeham at Winchester. One reads in Suger's life that he gathered round him "from different parts of the kingdom work- men of all kinds, masons, carpenters, painters, smiths, founders, goldsmiths, and lapidaries, all renowned for skill in their several arts." He tells us that he watched Abbot and surveyed the work with the greatest care, that he parT^th went himself to choose the materials, the stone from buildin s Pontoise, and timber from the forest of Yveline, and that he directed the sculptured and other ornament, giving their subjects to the carver, the glass painters, the goldsmiths, and supplying the inscriptions. He seems to have been at S. Denis what Justinian was at S. Sophia, who is described as haunting the work, dressed in white linen with a handkerchief round his head and a staff in his hand. But though Procopius, like a good courtier, attributes to Justinian some sagacious suggestions which he does not scruple to say must have come by divine inspiration, for the emperor was not skilled in con- struction 1 , he attributes the design to the real architects Anthemius and Isidorus. One may imagine that Suger played a similar part at S. Denis : that he watched and directed the work and gave many useful suggestions for plan, arrangement, and decoration : but it is not likely that any amateur, however accomplished, should be the author of a fresh constructional movement in architecture. The suggestion must have come from some practical master mason, the real architect of the building, who was to Suger and Bishop Hugh what William Wynford was to William of Wykeham. These enlightened prelates 1 oi> yap ort fitfjfumtig. Procop. De Aedif. 1 68 FRANCE ROYAL DOMAIN [CH. xxv s.Denis are nevertheless entitled to the credit of having re- cognized and valued and eagerly seized the opportunity for a forward step in art, instead of ignoring it and adhering to strict formula of tradition as the monastic schools would have done. In this way they may be regarded as instrumental in opening a new chapter in the history of art, though not themselves the inventors of the new system. Remains Of Suger's work, whether owing to accident, or more ^kely to imperfect building carried out with too great haste, and badly put together, is uncertain, nothing now remains but the west front with the two bays that form a sort of narthex, and at the other end the ambulatory round the apse with its radiating chapels and the crypt below. The whole of the church between these two extremities was re-built from the design of Pierre de Montereau, and the work which was begun about 1231, and not finished till 1281, is of course in fully developed Gothic. In the earlier work of Abbot Suger, we find traces of Romanesque ornament, but the con- struction may fairly be called Gothic. The chapels are fitted between radiating buttresses, and have each two single-light windows, which have pointed arches though those of the crypt are semi-circular. Beginning In the construction the system of equilibrium of afcht mted forces, which is the main principle of what we call Gothic tecture architecture, is fully recognized. Till the adoption of the pointed arch this principle could only be applied imperfectly, as we see at Ve"zelay ; the round arch not lending itself, as may easily be understood, to combinations of arches with unequal span. With the pointed arch came the opportunity of adaptation to any span and any height, and the greater elasticity thus attained led on CH. xxv] FRENCH ROMANESQUE 169 rapidly to all the infinite varieties of vault that followed. The old-fashioned barrel vault disappeared : a square theGothk bay was no longer necessary for setting out a cross vault vault : if the semi-circular arch were retained, as it was at first, for the diagonal rib, the rest being pointed could be raised to the same height if necessary, and they were generally raised to a height not much less, leaving the vault to be only slightly domical. With all these changes the art passed rapidly into a new phase, and in the great burst of cathedral building which marked the reign of Philip Augustus we find Romanesque tradition has little or no place. If we look round the other parts of France in the Summary middle of the i2th century, when this movement to- Roman!- wards a new style took place in the central domain, esque we find Romanesque art still running its course. In Burgundy, though the pointed arch had been admitted in the narthex of Ve"zelay, the general design still clung to ancient tradition, and the round arch still ruled the design. In Auvergne the round arch still reigned supreme, but the admirable skill of the architects of that province had refined and developed it into a style of their own so interesting and original that one regrets the Gothic invasion, which indeed never achieved more than a partial triumph over the native art. In Aquitaine and Anjou the domed style still prevailed, and may be traced to Loches in Touraine where as late as 1 1 80 the church was covered by what is practically a series of hollow spires. In Normandy the sturdy round-arched style followed a line of its own, owing but little to Roman tradition, practical, dignified, and severe, into which sculpture hardly enters at all. Lastly in Provence no movement at all had been made in the direction of 170 FRENCH ROMANESQUE [CH. xxv Gothic : classic tradition was strong, and Romanesque held its own. The portals of Aries and S. Gilles date from the middle or latter part of the i2th century and show no sign either of decline or of further develop- ment. Coincident The passage of architecture into a new phase was Sanges one incident in the social revolution that was taking place in other departments. The I2th century was an age of an intellectual upheaval of aspiration after liberty both of thought and civil life : for it was marked by the movement for enfranchisement of the communes, and also by the teaching of Abelard ; and though the two had little in common, they arose at the same time from The new the same stirring of the human mind. With Louis le Gros began the new royalty. He first undertook to police the kingdom, by repressing feudal outrages and " taking or reducing to submission the castles conspicuous as haunts of oppression." He first of the Capetians made royalty a real power, different from feudalism and superior to it, being intent, says Suger, on the real needs of the Church, and showing a care, long neglected, for the security of the labouring people, the artizans, and helpless poor. Feudalism was thus reduced to something like Enfran- obedience. The enfranchisement of the commons at- ofthT ent tac ked feudalism on another side: and since the monas- Commons terics had long given up the pretence of poverty, and had become great feudal potentates they came in for their share of popular odium. As the towns grew in wealth and power their assistance became valuable, and was bought in many cases by grants of charters from their feudal lord. The Count of Nevers, who disputed with the Abbot of Ve"zelay the suzerainty over the burghers of that town, granted them a constitution to attach them CH. xxv] THE SECULAR TRANSITION 171 to his side 1 . When they complained that the monks in Revolution revenge would not grind their corn or bake their bread, the Count told them if anyone hindered their baking they should put him on the fire, or if the miller opposed them, grind him in the mill. "I wish," he said, "the monks were gone and the abbey destroyed " ; and pluck- ing a hair from his raiment " Were the whole hill of Ve"zelay sunk in the abyss, I would not give this hair to save it." With this encouragement the burghers attacked the monks and sacked the convent, in spite of the thunders of the Pope, threats of excommunication against Count and people, and reproofs addressed to the Bishop of Autun whom the Pope accused of being the instigator of the outrage 2 . For the bishops and secular clergy had long been Antagon- jealous of the regulars, who were exempt from episcopal secular control, and responsible to the Pope alone. The decline *eg u iar of monastic and feudal influence in the i2th century, cler ey and the rise of popular communities gave the bishops an opportunity of which they were not slow to avail themselves. The great outburst of cathedral building Cathedral throughout France at the end of the I2th, and beginning of the 1 3th century, was a popular movement. The bishops ranged themselves on the side of the burghers, and the cathedral became a civic institution, an emblem of popular independence. Unlike the conventual church, from the principal parts of which laymen were rigidly excluded, the cathedral was open to all, a building 1 Constituitque illis Principes vel Judices quos et Consules appellari censuerunt. Spicil. Hist. Vizel. ill. 2 D'Achery, Spidlegium Hist. Vizeliacensis, Lib. I. Epist. XVII ; Eugenius, etc. Episcopo Eduensi...omnzs molestiae atque vexationes quas dilecto filio nostro Pontio Abbati Vizeliac. Burgenses ipsius villae ausu nefario prae- sumpserant, per instinctum et incitationem tuam habuerunt exordium. 172 THE SECULAR TRANSITION [CH. xxv in which the burgher could take pride, as being his own 1 . Practice Architecture now passed from the cloister to the tecture lay guilds of workmen. They were originally trained no doubt in the convent workshop, for though the monks had at first been their own workmen when all skilled labour was in their hands, they had long given that up and had trained craftsmen to work for them. Working now under free conditions and in a freer atmosphere the builders and master-masons gave new life to the art, discovered new methods, and developed a new style, new both in outward form and inward principle. Romanesque art in France was mainly a monastic art : only in the shelter of the cloister could art have survived in the confusion of the dark ages: and with the decline of monasticism it passed into other phases more expressive of the tendencies of the age. The change was most rapid and complete in the royal domain, the centre of the new social and political movements, and though in the remoter provinces Romanesque art lingered longer and in some parts can hardly be said to have quite disappeared, the new art finally triumphed and made itself felt from the English channel to the Pyrenees. 1 V.-le-Duc, Diet. Rais. in. 227. "Les cathe*drales ...a la fin du Xll e siecle avaient a la fois un caractere religieux et civil : et la, sauf 1'autel qui dtait entoure de ses voiles, rien n'obstruait la vue." This is disputed by M. Luchaire (Social France at the time of Philip Augitstus) who thinks the secular canons in the new cathedrals enclosed their choirs from the first with tapestries if nothing more. The two views do not seem irreconcileable. M. Luchaire is no doubt right in not believing that the bishops had any democratic sympathies. But this would not prevent their siding with the popular party, as the Popes did with the Guelfs, for political reasons, without any affection for their principles. CHAPTER XXVI ENGLISH ROMANESQUE BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST WHEN in the reign of Honorius the Romans finally withdrew from this island, after having governed and colonized it for 400 years, a period as long as that from the reign of Henry VIII to our own day, it will readily be understood that they left behind them traces of their rule not only in the civil constitution of the towns, which was modelled on the Roman system, but also in the architecture and other arts which they had brought with them and cultivated for so long a time. The whole country was dotted with Roman villas : many consider- archi - J tecture able towns had arisen under Roman protection, some of which possessed regular municipal privileges 1 . Colchester, Lincoln, Gloucester and York were Coloniae, and Veru- lamium (S. Albans) was a municipium. Gildas, whom Bede follows says there were twenty-eight cities besides some castles 1 . It is even supposed that in the cities of Southern and Eastern Britain, if not in the rural districts, Latin was becoming or had become the vernacular tongue 2 . The remains of towns and country houses throughout England testify to the refinement of society under Roman government. Excavation at Silchester has brought to light a British Pompeii ; similar discoveries have been made at Caerwent, and in the stations along the Roman wall, and await us at Verulam. The houses were large, handsomely finished with mosaic floors, and comfortably warmed by hypocausts. They show also by the difference between their plan and that of Italian villas that their design was accommodated to the climate. 1 ...bis denis, bisque quaternis civitatibus ac nonnullis castellis...decorata. Gildas, Prologus. 2 Haverfield, The Romanization of Roman Britain. i 7 4 ROMAN BRITAIN [CH. xxvi British Of the mysterious period of British history that disorder f o ii owe( j the departure of the Romans, when the natives were left to their own resources, we know just enough to tantalize us. A corner of the veil only is lifted for a moment by the monk Gildas, who wrote during the lull that interrupted the career of the Saxon conquest, after the invaders had been checked by the British victory at Mount Badon, and while the issue of the struggle was still doubtful. From him we gather that the Britons were with difficulty united in the presence of the enemy, and turned their swords against one another when the general danger was removed 1 . Writing forty-four years after the British victory at Mount Badon Gildas describes the country as laid waste and the cities no longer inhabited as formerly, but deserted and ruined, for though foreign wars had for the time ceased, civil wars took their place 2 . In such a state of society there was no room for the arts of peace. Buildings left by the Romans might be turned into defences against the Saxons, or castles for marauding chieftains, but it would be vain to look for any Britonsnot native architecture. The Britons had not assimilated Roman- R oman culture like the Gauls, and it is not likely that many Romans, if any, let the legions go without them. Among the princes whose vices Gildas castigates we find side by side with the Celtic names of Vortiporius, Cuneglasus and Maglocunus, the Latin Constantinus and Aurelius; but there is nothing to tell us whether they were Romans who had stayed behind, or Italianized Britons. All foreign artizans had probably departed 1 Moris namque continui erat genti, sicut et nunc est, ut inftrma esset ad retundenda hostium tela, et fortis esset ad civilia bella, et peccatorum onera sustinenda. Gildas, Epistola 19. 2 Ibid. 26, he tells us he was born in the year of the battle of Mount Badon, which was 520, so that his history was written in 564. CH. XXVl] ROMAN BRITAIN '75 i;6 ROMAN BRITAIN [CH. xxvi with the rest, and few if any of the Britons were able, even if their civil wars gave them leisure, to carry on the arts and industries that had flourished under Roman rule. British The Britons it was true were Christians, and had churches of which some remains have come down to us, but they show only very humble architectural skill. Excavations siichester at Silchester in 1893 exposed the foundations of a small basilican church, which dating as it must from some time between Constantine's Edict of Milan in 313 and the departure of the Romans in 411, may fairly be considered the earliest ecclesiastical building in England of which we have any trace. Small as it is, only 42 ft. in length with a nave 10 ft. wide, it is in miniature a perfect basilica, with nave and aisles, apse, narthex, and transepts. The walls are 2 ft. thick, of flint rubble with tile coigns (Fig. 113)*. Conformably to primitive rule the apse is at the west and the entrance at the east end, and the altar was on the chord of the apse, the position of the priest being behind it, facing the people and looking eastward. Both church and narthex are paved with mosaic of plain red tesserae, except for a square with an elegant pattern before the apse, on which or in front of which the altar would have stood. Although two churches of British Christendom were found at Canterbury by Augustine and repaired and restored to use, most of them had, no doubt, been swept away at the return of Paganism with the Saxon conquest. In S. Martin's the traces of Roman work are dubious, but the plan of the little church of S. Pancras (Fig. 114) can be made out, though if any part of it be Roman it was a good deal altered after the arrival of Augustine. 1 Archaeol. vol. 53, p. 563, etc. I am indebted to the Society of Antiquaries for this illustration. CH. XXVl] ROMAN BRITAIN 177 The earliest church in Britain according to tradition Giaston- was at Glastonbury, where a legend, of which Bede is ignorant, has it that Joseph of Arimathea built a humble fane of wattle and daub. Such a structure apparently existed in Dunstan's time, and was so highly revered that he enclosed it in his new church. And when after the conquest the abbey was again re-built an inscription was placed on a column to record the exact size and position of the primitive chapel. Its dimensions, 60 ft. STPANCRAS. CANTERBURY 1 tt Fig. 114. by 26, seem to have been taken by S. Patrick as the model for several churches in Ireland. Sir Gilbert Scott says they are nearly the same at the Saxon churches of Brixworth, Worth, and Dover 1 . During the two centuries which it took the Saxons to The complete their conquest the remains of Roman architecture i n a v x a " must have suffered considerably ; and as the Saxons, like the Slavs in Eastern Europe, were a rural and not an 1 Mediaeval Architecture^ vol. 1 1. p. 19. J. A. II, 12 i;8 ROMAN BRITAIN [CH. xxvi Neglect of urban people, hating towns and living in the country, as the many " ings, hams, and thorpes" among our villages testify, the Roman cities were probably left to decay, except so far as some of the old British population may have been allowed to linger there. Bishop Stubbs says that London and York preserved a continuous life as well as some other cities ; and when the land was ravaged by Danish invasion the Saxons were driven to take refuge in the towns and restore their fortifications. When the time came for re-building, and the need of architecture made itself felt once more, the land must still have been covered with examples of Roman work to inspire the efforts of the builder, although in Britain, the remotest province of the Empire, Roman art, as might be expected, failed to reach the standard of Provence and Southern Gaul. Many of its remains are of very rude Roman workmanship, but at BATH, where the Roman Thermae were on a really magnificent scale, the architecture and its decoration are not inferior to the contemporary work of the later 2nd or 3rd century at Rome itself. The tympanum of the temple (Plate CXXXIII), dedicated, it is supposed, to Sul-Minerva (Deae Suli Minervae), is very irregularly composed. The helmet on one side, with the scalp of some wild beast drawn over it, would have been ill-balanced on the other by the little crouching human figure whose left hand holding a staff remains in front of the owl's wing. Other miniature figures appear to have filled the corners of the pediment, quite out of scale with the large "Victories" that support the disc. But though the tympanum does not reach a very high classic standard in point of composition or execution it is the work of no mean craftsman, and the great Corinthian capital which belongs to it is excellently modelled. Nothing nearly so CH. xxvi] ROMAN BRITAIN 179 good was done in Britain during the next nine hundred Temple at . Bath years 1 . The Roman buildings at Bath were no doubt wrecked by the Saxons, as well as those in other parts of the Kingdom ; but their ruins must have been for many succeeding centuries sufficiently imposing to excite admiration. Giraldus Cambrensis describes the city of Caerleon- Caerieon- upon-Usk, the old Urbs legionum, and the centre of l Arthurian romance, as still retaining in 1188 much of its Roman magnificence, though apparently in ruins. "Here you may see," he says, "many traces of former magnifi- cence ; immense palaces that once with gilded pinnacles of their roofs imitated the splendour of Rome, having been originally erected by Roman princes, and adorned with fine buildings ; a gigantic tower ; magnificent baths ; remains of temples, and places for theatrical shows, all enclosed by fine walls partly still standing. You will find everywhere, both within the circuit of the walls and without, subterranean buildings, ducts of water and channels underground ; and what I thought especially noteworthy, you may see everywhere stoves contrived 1 In the central head some see Sul, the native deity of the hot springs, whom the Romans, after their fashion, identified with the Minerva of their own mythology, just as Caesar makes Mercury the chief deity of the Druid Pantheon. The owl is appropriate to Minerva, but Sul was a female deity, and the head is a male one. Others see in it the Gorgon, on the strength of the snakes in the hair, but Medusa has no need to add wings and a pair of moustaches to her other charms. Some think it the Sun, from the confusion of Sol and Sul, which led to Bath being called Aquae Salts instead of Aquae Suits : but this does not explain the snakes and the star. I venture to suggest Aesculapius, the proper president over the healing waters, on the ground of the snakes, and the star into which Jupiter turned him after killing him with a thunderbolt, and for which the other theories do not account. The wings, I confess, still need explanation. 12 2 i8o ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi with wonderful art, so that certain lateral and very narrow passages secretly exhale the heat 1 ." Roman It was therefore natural that in England, as in France model ( and Germany, the ambition of the infant schools of archi- tecture, as soon as they came into being, was to revive that art of Ancient Rome which was their only model, and which even in this remote province, though it had none of the grand structures of Southern Gaul to show, was very far beyond their feeble powers of imitation. Wooden The earliest Saxon buildings were of wood, a material tecture of so abundant in England as to influence our architecture down to almost modern times. The Saxons' word for to build was getymbrian, and in dealing with timber they probably showed greater facility than they did in masonry, having been originally a seafaring folk like their cousins the Northmen. In 627 king Edwin was baptized at York in the church of the Apostle Peter, which he had built hastily of wood 2 . Soon afterwards, however, under the advice of Paulinus, who as a Roman had experience of more solid work, he replaced it by a larger and more splendid basilica of stone. This the Saxons proudly called building more Romanorum, while that in wood was described as in more Scottorum. So when Finan, bishop of Lindisfarne, in 652 built his church of timber and thatched it with reeds Bede says it was done in the manner of the Scots 3 . 1 Giraldus Cambrensis, Itinerarium Cambriae, Cap. V. Henry of Hunting- don (Book l) writing about 1 135 says "Kair- Legion in qua fuit archiepiscopatus tempore Britonum, nunc autem vix moenia ejus comparent," and Giraldus on the strength of this passage is accused of exaggeration. But he says he saw these things, and we know he was there with Archbishop Baldwin recruiting for the third Crusade. 2 Quam ipse de ligno... citato opere construxit. Bede, Eccl. Hist. n. xiv. 3 Quam tamen, more Scottorum, non de lapide sed de robore secto totam composuit, atque arundine texit. Bede, Eccl. Hist. ill. xxv. CH. xxvi] ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD 181 The first efforts of the Saxons in masonry were naturally not very successful. In 30 years Edwin's church at York had fallen into disrepair, and in 669 Wilfrid Wilfrid's work repaired it, covered the roof with lead, replaced the linen or pierced boards of the windows with glass, and whitened the walls above the whiteness of snow. Even the tombs and shrines of saints were made of wood. In 672 Ceadda, bishop of Lichfield, was buried in a wooden tomb, shaped like a little house 1 . At Greensted near Ongar in Essex there still exists a humble church Greensted of timber, not indeed of this early date, but perhaps the wooden church near Aungre mentioned in the chronicle of Bury as receiving the relics of S. Edmund in 1013. Its wall consists of balks of timber set close together side by side and resting on a wooden cill. The first serious step towards a Saxon Romanesque Benedict style was taken in 674 when Benedict Biscop 2 , on his Monk P - at return to his native Northumbria from a third journey to JJJSSi Rome, was charged by king Egfrith to build a monastery at the mouth of the river Wear. After a year's work in laying foundations, Benedict, in despair of finding masons in England, crossed to Gaul where he succeeded in finding them, and brought them back with him 3 . Such speed was Artizans made that within a year service was held in the new church. Again, when the building was ready Benedict 1 Tumba lignea in modum domunculae facta. 2 Florence of Worcester (anno 653) calls him Benedictus cognomento Biscop, regis Oswiu minister, nobili stirpe gentis Anglorum progenitus. Kemble (Proceedings of the Archaeol. Inst. 1845) says the surname is curious in one who was not a bishop, but it occurs in the ancient genealogy of the kings of Lindissi, to whom he may have been related. Benedictus he thinks may be a name earned by the frequent pilgrimages to Rome. 3 Caementarios, qui lapideam sibi ecclesiam juxta Romanorum, quern semper amabat, morem facerent, postulavit, accepit, attulit Bede, Opuscula, ed. Giles, p. 366. 182 ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi Monk- sent messengers to Gaul to bring glass-makers to glaze the windows of both church and monastery, the art of glass-making being unknown in Britain at that time. "It was done : they came ; and not only did the work required of them, but taught the English how to do it for themselves." From abroad also this religiosus emptor purchased the sacred vessels of the altar and the vest- ments for the clergy, for nothing of the sort was to be had at home. Church But even Gaul did not furnish all he wanted for the from " furnishing and adornment of his church. Benedict him- self made a fourth journey to Rome, and brought back an " innumerable quantity of books and relics : he in- troduced the Roman mode of chanting," and even persuaded John, the arch-chanter of S. Peter's and Abbot of S. Martin's, to return with him to teach the English clergy. Among his pupils was the youthful Bede who tells the story 1 . Benedict also brought back from Rome many pictures for the adornment of his church and the edification of an illiterate people : a painting of the Virgin and the Apostles, which stretched from wall to wall, pictures of the gospel-story for the south wall, pictures of the Apocalyptic vision for the north, "so that all who entered the church, even if ignorant of letters, whichever way they turned should either contemplate the ever lovely aspect of Christ and his Saints, though only in a picture, or should with more watchful mind revere the grace of our Lord's incarnation ; or else having as it were the trial of the last judgment before their eyes they might remember to examine themselves more strictly." Rome was at this time under Byzantine rule, and 1 Hist. Ecd. Lib. IV. c. xviii. Vita, ed. Giles, vol. I. p. cl. CH. xxvi] ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD 183 Byzantine influences were strong there as may be seen in Byzantine the mural paintings of the lately excavated church of S. Maria Antica, with their Greek names and inscrip- tions 1 . These paintings which Benedict brought back from Rome would probably have been Byzantine works. In a fifth journey to Rome, which shows how much more people travelled in those days than we are apt to suppose, Biscop brought back further treasures. Eight years later, in 682, a fresh endowment by king church at Egfrith enabled Benedict to found a second monastery, ] which he dedicated to S. Paul, five miles off at Jarrow, where the Venerable Bede lived and died, removing thither as soon as it was built, from Monkwearmouth. These contemporary accounts, for Bede was born three years before Biscop brought over his French masons, and entered the new convent when he was seven years old, give a lively picture of the state of the Arts in England in the 7th century. Roman tradition Early was gone, the Saxons had no native art of their own and ar a c hi" had to begin again and build one up afresh. Masonry * was a forgotten art : wooden walls, thatched roofs, windows closed with linen or shutters, a floor probably of bare earth strewn with rushes, this till Biscop and Wilfrid came to the rescue, was the best they could do. The new art progressed but slowly. S. Cuthbert built a monastery at Lindisfarne in 684, surrounded by a circular enclosure made of rough stone and turf, and the dwellings within were of earth and rough timber covered with thatch 2 . In Ireland, even as late as the I2th cen- Irish tury, though Mr Petrie thinks there were stone churches 1 v. sup. vol. I. p. 204. See Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. I. p. 17- 2 Bede, Vila S. Cuthberli. 1 84 ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi s.Maiachy as early as the time we are speaking of, when S. Malachy, >angor archbishop of Armagh, who died in 1148 began to build a chapel of stone at Bangor near Belfast, the natives exclaimed in astonishment " What has come over you, good man, that you should introduce such a novelty into our country ? We are Scots, not Gauls. What levity is this? What need is there of such proud unnecessary work ? How will you, who are but a poor man, find means to finish it, and who will live to see it brought to perfection ? " Monk- Benedict's church at MONKWEARMOUTH, as the place JJ"k came to be called, was no doubt the wonder of the age in church England at that time, though according to our ideas it was a modest enough achievement. It remains to a great extent to this day. The plan was simplicity itself. The nave, an unbroken rectangle about 60 x 1 9 ft. inside, and 68 x 22*8 ft. outside, exactly three times as long as its width, was preceded at the west end by a porch over which The was a tower (Fig. 115). It is orientated, and no doubt ea^end ended square, but the original Saxon chancel was pulled down and re-built by the Normans, together with the chancel arch 1 . The square end and western porch con- form to the primitive type of British church architecture. The little oratories of Scotland and Ireland, which go back to the time of S. Patrick, are rectangular chambers squarely ended ; and in the square end of the English church, which has continued as a national characteristic to the present day, we have a survival of the primitive Christian temple such as the oratory of Gallerus and the 1 It has been suggested that two blocks, carved with lions, now fixed in the vestry wall, were the imposts of the Saxon chancel arch, Original church of S. Peter, Monkwearmouth, G. F. Browne. The tower arch of S. Bene't's at Cambridge has two beasts at the springing, and so has the chancel arch at Deerhurst CH. xxvi] ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD 185 rude chapels on the western isles of Ireland illustrated by Monk- Mr Petrie. The length of the church at Monkwear- mouth mouth corresponds almost exactly with the dimension of 60 ft. prescribed by S. Patrick for one of his churches, a Fig. 115. dimension probably imitated from the primitive Christian chapel at Glastonbury. The western part of the church, including the west The porch doorway, is now generally admitted to be Biscop's work, but only the lower part of the tower is original, for Monk- wear- mouth i86 ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi marks in the masonry show that it finished with a gabled roof above the second storey : the upper part, however, is still Saxon work though of the 1 1 th century. The porch under the tower has a barrel vault, with its axis east and west, and doorways on all four sides, the western one having very remarkable baluster shafts in Fig. 116. the jambs (Fig. 116). They carry a massive impost block from which the arch springs, and they rest on upright slabs reaching through the wall and carved with two curious serpentine creatures intertwined and with beaked heads. A frieze sculptured with animals, now much defaced, runs across the wall above. In the tower wall above this archway was apparently CH. xxvi] ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD 187 a figure carved in relief about 6 ft. high. It would have Monk- been a valuable specimen of Saxon art, but it has suffered mouth the fate of similar Saxon sculptures at Headbourn- Worthy, Bitton, and Deerhurst, and been defaced. The proportions of the church are very lofty, and the Lofty pitch of the roof is very steep, in both respects contrast- I ing very strongly with the usual proportion of the churches in the Norman style that succeeded. This feature of great height both in the body of the church and in the tower is a characteristic of Saxon architecture. The same lofty proportions are found at the Saxon Deerhurst church of DEERHURST on the Severn, between Tewkesbury arid Gloucester (Fig. 117), which was founded before 800, but probably altered a good deal in the nth century when it was restored after being damaged by the Danes. It has a western tower 70 ft. high, of which however the lower half only is original, and a narrow and lofty nave, to which aisles were added in the i2th and i3th centuries, though there seem to have been Saxon aisles before them. The tower arches are small and semi-circular, springing from simple impost blocks. There seems to have been a western gallery, the door of which, now blocked, appears in the tower wall. Above, still looking into the nave, the tower has a two light window with straight-sided arches like the arcading at Lorsch (v. sup. p. 6, Plate LXXXIII) the resemblance being increased by the fluted pilaster which divides the lights. Three triangular openings in the west and side walls of the nave are difficult to explain. The chancel was originally square, with an arch to the nave, and another to an apsidal sanctuary which has now disappeared. The arrangement looks like preparation for a central tower, but the wall and arch separating the chancel i88 ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi Deerhurst from the nave which would have formed the west side of the central tower has disappeared and there is now no division (Plan, Fig. 118). A similar square compartment or chancel, for a central tower, occurs at the Saxon Fig. 117. churches in Dover Castle and at Repton. Mr Mickle- thwaite believes that these and other Saxon churches of the same type had two towers, the central one for interior CH. xxvi] ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD 189 dignity, the western for a campanile, and possibly for habitation in the upper part. At the church at Ramsey Ramsey built in 969 there were two towers " quarum minor versus occidentem... major vero in quadrifidae structurae medio," &c., &C. 1 At Dover the place of a second tower at the Dover west end is supplied by the Roman Pharos, which was once connected to the nave by a short passage. ('after IktHerv/btta} ~^*ro 60 70 go ? t I I A.remams Fig. 1 1 8. Deerhurst has another Saxon building, the chapel of Duke Odda, dedicated to the Trinity by Bishop Aeldred chapel in iO56 a . It consists of a nave and chancel communicat- ing by a round arch on plain jambs with impost blocks simply chamfered on the under side. The arch has a 1 Hist. Ramszensis, cited Micklethwaite, Arch. Journal, Dec. 1896. 2 The date and name of the founder are preserved on an inscribed stone now preserved in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford. 190 ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi plain unmoulded label, and the entrance doorway is like it. The windows are splayed both inwards and outwards. The total length is 46 ft., the chancel is n ft. wide, and the nave 16 ft. wide and 17 ft. to the plate. The Long and coigns are of the long and short work frequent in Saxon building, though not peculiar to it, for I have seen some at a church in the Val d' Aosta, and the same construction has been noticed at Pompeii, at Tours, and round about Caen 1 . It consists of alternate courses, one being long and narrow, set upright, like a small post, and the next a broad flat stone set on its bed and bonding back into the wall. These long and short coigns are not found in the earlier Saxon churches, and are a sign of later date. The Saxon A lofty tower at the west end of the nave is almost an essential feature of the later Saxon churches built in the loth and nth centuries. It occurs at Earl's Barton, Barton-on-Humber, Barnack, Brixworth, Wittering, Cor- bridge, and Clapham in Bedfordshire. At S. Andrew's s. Rule the tower of S. Regulus or S. Rule has a strange likeness to the Lombard Campaniles, and might have been trans- planted bodily from Italy (Plate CXXXIV). Like the Lombard towers the English pre-conquest towers have no buttresses, but rise four-square from base to summit. It appears that in some cases they formed The Tower the actual nave of the church, which was completed by a square chamber on the west, and another square chamber on the east, one being the baptistery and the other the chancel. The upper chamber in the tower, often as at Deerhurst furnished with windows looking into the church, and treated with some attention, may have been 3 Baldwin Brown in the Builder of 1895. Notes on Pre-conquest Archi- tecture in England, No. vii. Plate C XXX IV S. RULE S. ANDRKWS Plate CXXXT r . ! ,lt i ,{: Jj J C EARL'S BARTON CH. xxvi] ENGLAND-SAXON PERIOD 191 used for habitation 1 . The church at Barton-on-Humber seems to have been of this form originally 2 . The decoration by slightly projecting strips of stone strip-work i . . . decoration sometimes arranged in various patterns, is a very curious Fig. 119. feature of Saxon architecture. Although strip-work of a kind is to be seen in German Romanesque the way it was employed by the Saxon architects is quite original and 1 Mr Micklethwaite who elaborates this theory credits the tower church to Danish influence. 2 Earlier history of Barton-on-Humber, R. Brown, F.S.A., with illustra- tions by Prof. Baldwin Brown. i 9 2 ENGLAND SAXON PERIOD [CH. xxvi national, and it owes nothing to Roman example. The best specimens of it are at the two Bartons that have been just mentioned, and in the tower at EARL'S BARTON (Plate CXXXV and Fig. 119) it is so profusely used that it almost deserves to be called splendid. It occurs also Corhamp- in the little Saxon church of CORHAMPTON in Hampshire, ton Earl's Barton ury Augustine in 602, and enlarged, re-roofed, and restored by Odo about 950. A description of it has been left us by Edmer who saw it pulled down and its successor built. He had been to Rome with Anselm, and had seen Constantine's church of S. Peter there, and he says the church at Canterbury was in some part imitated from it. The resemblance between two churches so vastly different in scale and execution could only relate to points 1 Ecclesiam Salvatoris, quam cum prefatum incendium turn vetustas inutilem fecerat, funditus destruere et augustiorem construere cupiens, etc. Edmer, cited Willis, Architectural History of Canterbury Cathedral, * CH. xxvii] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 211 of ritual arrangement ; and if we compare the plan of S. Peter's (v. supra vol. i. p. 19, Fig. 2) with that of the Saxon church at Canterbury which Willis has con- atr structed from Edmer's account (Fig. 127), it would seem to be confined to the presbytery, which Edmer tells us was raised over a crypt or confessionary like S. Peter's, and had to be reached by many steps from the choir of Fig. 127. the singers. This chorus cantorum was in the nave like those at S. Clemente and S. Maria in Cosmedin in Rome and the excavated basilica of Salona in Dalmatia 1 . The two flanking towers have nothing in common with S. Peter's. At the west end Edmer tells us was the altar of the Virgin, raised some height and reached by steps, and behind it against the wall was the Pontifical 1 Chorus psallentium in aulam ecclesiae porrigebatur, decenti fabrica a frequentia turbae seclusus. Edmer, cited Willis. 142 212 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. XXVH Canter- bury The new cathedral chair 1 . Willis conjectures that this implies a western apse, which may have been the original presbytery before orientation became the rule. Lanfranc's new cathedral was a basilica ending in an apse with transepts, and a central tower over the crossing. On the east of each transept was an apsidal chapel, and the whole plan was very like that at Westminster (Fig. 128). Willis observes that the dimensions of the new Cathedral so far as can be ascertained, correspond very closely with those of S. Etienne at Caen, of which Lanfranc had been the first abbot, and which was built under his direction. Nothing however is now to be seen of Lanfranc's ^anfrajic CANTERBURY * -Conrad SDO. Fig. 128. cathedral but a few patches of masonry opposite the spot where Becket fell. The choir was pulled down twenty years after its completion and re-built on a much Emuifand grander scale by Priors Ernulf and Conrad between glorious 1096 and i no. To them we owe all the Norman work now visible above ground (Plate CXLI), and the greater part of the crypt. In the slender jamb-shafts of the windows and the rich interlacing wall-arcades we see an 1 Ad hoc altare cum sacerdos ageret divina mysteria faciem ad populum qui deorsum stabat ad orientem versam habebat. Edmer, cited Willis. \ Plate CXLI CANTERBURY South-east Transept o CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 213 advance of the style towards greater delicacy and re- Canter- finement. Some of the colonnettes are twisted, some octagonal, and others are enriched with diaper ornament. Some of the capitals are rudely carved, but most are of the cushion form though often relieved by fluting. The crypt (Plate CXLII), the finest in England and The crypt among the finest in Europe, is vaulted with cross-groining carried on monocylindrical pillars with plain transverse ribs between the bays. Many of the shafts are enriched with fluted patterns, scaled, zigzaged or twisted, and the capitals are either plain cushions, or carved with rude Corinthianizing foliage, or storied with grotesque beasts. On one a devilish goat plays the fiddle to another, who is riding on a fish and blowing a trumpet. This Norman crypt of about noo extends under the smaller transept, and stops at the eastern apsidal end of Prior Conrad's choir. The rest of the present crypt eastwards is of the later building after the fire of 1174. The great church at WINCHESTER had been re-built win- for the third time by Kynegils king of Wessex on his conversion in 635, and it became a cathedral shortly after when the see was transferred thither from Dor- chester in Oxfordshire. As usual various miracles attended its erection. A mason named Godus fell from top to bottom of the structure, but no sooner touched the ground than he rose unhurt, wondered how he got there, signed himself with the cross, mounted the scaffolding, and taking his trowel continued his work where he left off 1 . It is described in an elegiac poem of 330 lines by 1 Annales de Wintonia, Rolls Series. These miracles are not peculiar to Christian legends. A workman on the Parthenon who fell from a height was cured by a medicine which Pallas revealed to Pericles in a dream. (Plutarch, Life of Pericles.") 214 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. XXVH win- the monk Wolstan, who-following the similar descriptions thfsSon of Wilfrid's churches at Ripon and Hexham, enlarges on cathedral ^ m y St erious intricacy of the fabric. The stranger arriving in the courts knows not which way to go, so many doors stand open to invite him ; and casting a wandering eye hither and thither he stands transfixed with amazement at the fine roofs of Daedalian art, till some one familiar with the place guides him to the threshold. Here he marvels, crosses himself, and with astonished breast wonders how he shall go out, so splendijd and various is the construction. As Wolstan only conducts his visitor to the threshold of the church, all this mystification would seem to belong to an atrium before it, which may have had chapels or other monastic apartments opening from it to puzzle strangers. Bishop But all this was not good enough for the Norman building** bishop Walkelyn, a cousin of the Conqueror, who began a new cathedral in 1079. In 1086 it was ready for roofing. The king had given the bishop leave to take as much timber from Hempage wood as he could cut in three days and three nights, and Walkelyn managed to cut down and carry off the whole wood within that time. The king coming soon after was quasi in extasi fadus. "Am I bewitched ?" said he, " Had I not here a delight- ful wood ? " On learning the truth he was in furorem versus, and Walkelyn only obtained pardon by the most abject humiliation 1 . The new church was finished in 1103 and consecrated in the presence of nearly all the bishops and abbots of England. The old Saxon church was still standing close 1 Postremo Rex, "certe," inquit, " Walkeline, ego nimis prodigus largitor, et tu nimis avidus exstitisti acceptor." Annales de Wintonia (Annales Monastici, vol. II. p. 34, Rolls Series). CH. xxvuj ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 215 by, but its demolition was begun the next day. Till win- then, there would have been the strange spectacle of cathedral three great churches of cathedral size in one enclosure ; for a few yards away, so near that the services of one church disturbed those of the other, stood Alfred's New- Minster, which was not removed to Hyde outside the town till a little later. THE XOKMAN CATHEDRAL. WINCHESTER THE EXISTING CATHEDRAL. Fig. 129. WINCHESTER cathedral is the longest or the longest its size but one in the kingdom, but Walkelyn's west front reached 40 ft. still further westward (Fig. 129). Its gigantic proportions were probably occasioned by the 216 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn win- great flow of pilgrims to the shrine of S. S within. This cSfof' good bishop of Winchester was a very popular saint : s. Swithin Canterbury for a long while had no relics so attractive as his, and the monks were furiously jealous of the abbey in the older capital, which threatened their ecclesiastical supremacy. The possession of a great relic was the fortune of a convent. Gloucester for a long while was as badly off as Canterbury, till Abbot Thokey sagaciously begged the body of the murdered king Edward II, which from fear of the queen had been denied burial at Malmesbury and Bristol ; and he was rewarded by a stream of pilgrims to the shrine of the Lord's anointed which filled the coffers of the Abbey to overflowing. It was even said that the monks of Canterbury regarded the martyrdom of Becket as a blessing in disguise, enabling them to eclipse all other places of pilgrimage in England, and almost in Europe. The cult of S. Swithin however did not languish, and it was to accommodate the swarms of pilgrims that Bishop Godfrey de Lucy built the beautiful retro-choir, almost a church by itself, in the first years of the 1 3th century. The The greater part of Walkelyn's fabric still remains, though disguised in the nave by Wykeham's Perpen- dicular casing : but the transepts and the crypt have preserved their original form unaltered (Plate CXLIII). The aisles were vaulted in rubble masonry, with trans- verse arches dividing bay from bay, but no diagonal ribs. The upper roofs were, and in the transepts still are ceiled with wood. The details are rude, almost bar- barous ; the masses of masonry enormous ; the detail Absence of simplicity itself. No sculpture decorates it, the only ornament is a billet or dentil such as any mason could CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 217 chop out. The columns have mere cushion capitals win- formed by squaring off the four sides of an inverted cathedral and truncated cone or hemisphere. Those in the crypt are strangely primitive, and seem rude imitations of some Doric capital that may have survived from Roman Venta Belgarum. Across the end of each transept (Plate CXLIII) there is the peculiar feature of a gallery, formed by returning the arches and vaults of the aisles The 11. , - r transept with nothing over them, so as to form a terrace from gallery triforium to triforium. The same feature occurs in Normandy, at S. fitienne in Caen, at the fine church of Boscherville and in that at Cerisy-le-Foret, from which it would appear to be a feature peculiar to Norman architecture, though an instance of something like it exists at Le Puy in Auvergne 1 . The isolated column in the middle of the north transept, "the Martyrdom," at Canterbury, which together with the vault it carried was removed for the convenience of the pilgrims, belonged to a similar structure ; and there was a corresponding one in the south transept. The two storeyed apsidal chapel on the east side of the transept at the Priory church of Christchurch suggests a similar arrangement there. The Norman design of the transepts, which once extended to the nave, is a good example of the import- ance given to the triforium in northern Romanesque. In the south of France, in Aquitaine, Provence, and Auvergne, either there is no triforium or it is very small. In Italy it is generally the same thing, at all events during the Romanesque period, except where the church was built under Byzantine influence as S. Mark's, and 1 That at Le Puy however is not in its original state but has been brought forward. 218 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Win- S. Vitale, though their galleries differ somewhat from the cathedral northern triforium. S. Ambrogio also is an exception. In the east and in the Greek church the gallery plays an important part as the women's quarter, but it is difficult to account for its appearance in the north, where women were not separately provided for. The apse From the crypt (Fig. 130) we can recover exactly the form of the eastern termination of Walkelyn's church. It was apsidal with a sweep of great mono-cylindrical columns ; the base of one of them may still be seen in Bishop Gardiner's chantry. It had an ambulatory aisle, and seems to have been flanked on each side by a small square tower. Eastwards was projected a Lady-chapel, aisle-less, and apsidal. The canted end of the decorated choir is accommodated to the original apsidal plan, and the eastern piers rest in great measure, though not entirely, on the original Norman foundation. The piers of De Lucy's work bear on the walls of the Norman crypt below the original Lady-chapel. Win - The crypt is one of the largest in the kingdom the crypt (Fig. 130), built with immensely massive piers, from which spring flat plain transverse ribs, and cross-groining of rubble work, plastered. It has an ambulatory aisle like the superstructure and its continuation eastward under what was the Norman Lady-chapel, is divided down the centre by a row of columns, carrying cross- groining like the rest. There is no ornament of any kind, and the capitals are as simple as the rest of the work. win- Winchester had a central tower which like many tower Norman towers fell soon after it was built. The recon- struction was begun at once in 1107, and the new tower is beautifully decorated inside with Norman arcadings, Plate CXLI1I WINCHESTER North Transept Plate CXLIV ELY North Transept CH. xxvii] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 219 220 ENGLANDNORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Win- intended to have been seen as a lantern from the church, but now hidden by wooden groining of 1634. Rude as the work is at Winchester the general effect of Walkelyn's building is magnificently impressive, and there are few fa$ades so grand and so satisfactory as that of the south transept. Ely ELY cathedral was begun at the same time as Win- chester by Prior Simeon who was Walkelyn's brother, and as was natural there is a certain resemblance between the Norman work at the two places. At Ely one bay of the nave and one of each transept have been absorbed by Alan de Walsinghatn's octagon, constructed after the fall of the Norman tower in 1321. At Winchester the nave has lost one arch through the setting back of the west front of the nave by Bishop Edyngton in the middle of the 1 4th century. But originally both cathedrals seem to have had 13 arches in the nave, and four in the transepts. At both churches the transepts have aisles on both sides, both ended with a short choir and an apse, though Winchester alone had an ambulatory round it. There is even some ground for supposing that Ely had the same gallery from triforium to triforium, occupying the last bay of the transept. Abbot Simeon however, who was 87 when he went to Ely in 1081, did not live to carry his walls very high, and the cathedral is in a later style of Norman than his brother's church at Winchester. Probably the only part of Simeon's work is the lower storey of the transepts (Plate CXLIV), which is in an earlier style than the upper part ; but even there the capitals of the great round columns (Fig. 141 inf.) show an attempt at decoration beyond anything to be seen at Winchester. After Simeon's death in 1093 no abbot was appointed by CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 221 William II, and the office remained vacant till it was Ely filled by Abbot Richard in uoo, who finished the eastern part, which is now superseded by a later building. The nave and the Norman stages of the western tower were completed by Bishop Riddell (1174-1189). The greater part of the nave and transepts is still of the original building, but the eastern limb was re-built and prolonged by Bishop Hugh de Northwold between 1229 and 1254 in the Early Pointed style, when the national square east end took the place of the Norman apse. The Norman pillars of the nave have shafts run- ning up to the roof to mark the bays, but are alternately composed of clustered columns, and mono-cylindrical columns with small shafts attached. This gives an agreeable variety to the piers, which would, if all alike, have been monotonous. At the west end is a second transept of later Norman work, with a great tower in the middle of the west end of the nave ; and the design included a wing on either side, of which only the southern one now exists, with an apsidal chapel on its eastern side and two round Norman turrets at the end. This is a singular feature, reminding one of the great churches on the Rhine, though the motive for a western transept, which is there supplied by a second apse and choir, is wanting here. At Ely the nave and transepts never received their stone vaults, and are still ceiled with timber. NORWICH cathedral was begun by Bishop Losinga in Norwich 1096 after he had moved the see thither from Thetford. It is built on a superb scale, and still remains a Norman church, with an eastern apse surrounded by an ambulatory aisle, and with two chapels attached to the sides of it like those at Canterbury and Gloucester. A similar chapel 222 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Norwich for Our Lady at the east end probably completed the cathedral or jg ma j chevet, but it was replaced by a larger rectangular one in the 1 3th century which has in its turn disappeared. The central tower is crowned with a later spire which was added in the i5th century and this, with the apse and the flying buttresses that support the i5th century clerestory and vault of the choir, makes the exterior of this cathedral exceptionally picturesque. The nave is some half-century later than the eastern limb ; it is enormously long and has 14 bays, and the choir, with four bays before the apse, is longer than the usual Norman proportion. If the nave was built by Bishop Eborard (1121-1145), as is supposed, its style is very archaic for that date. The pillars as at Ely are of two kinds, placed alternately. The principal piers are formed of a cluster of attached colonnettes with cushion capitals, some of which run up to the roof and serve as vaulting shafts. The intermediate pillars also now have attached colonnettes, but they have been cased and altered, the bases of the colonnettes that were added being of I5th century work. Originally they seem to have been huge mono-cylindrical columns without colonnettes attached, but with a single vaulting shaft only on the nave side starting above the capital. In the eastern bay of the nave on each side one column remains in its original state (Plate CXLV) with a simple spreading cushion capital and spiral flutings. The casing of another column has been cut into, revealing similar flutings behind it, and there seems no doubt that like those at Durham these huge round columns once alter- nated all down the nave. The triforium consists of great open arches, undivided into two lights by the usual central column, and is almost if not quite equal in height to the arcade below, resembling in this the proportion * NORWICH South Nave Aisle CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 223 of those noticed in preceding chapters at Tournai in Norwich Belgium, and in Normandy. The same stern simplicity reigns here as at Winchester and Ely : the capitals are of the plain cushion form, and the arches are little more than square-cut openings through the walls, which seems a survival of the Saxon method. The wide soffits thus formed give space for several attached shafts with cushion capitals set side by side, both below in the arcade and above in the triforium. The exterior of DURHAM, with its three massive towers, Durham its enormous bulk, and its superb position on a rocky promontory round which the river Wear sweeps in a grand wooded defile, makes perhaps the most impressive picture of any cathedral in Europe (Plate CXLVI). Terror of the Danes drove away the monks in 875 from Lindisfarne, where S. Aidan had been established by King Oswald, and where S. Cuthbert in 684 had built a monastery of rude huts of timber and earth, within an enclosure of stone and turf 1 . For eight years they wandered, carrying with them the precious body of S. Cuthbert, before they found a temporary resting place at Chester-le-Street ; and it was not till 995 that they finally settled on the impregnable site of Durham. In The Saxon 999 Bishop Aldhun built the first stone church there. c This was destroyed by William of S. Carilef, the second Norman bishop, who laid the first stone of a new minster The in 1093. Before his death he had completed the eastern part as far as the crossing, including the east side of the transepts; and the monks continued the work afterwards, completing the transepts and central crossing, and the first bay of the nave. The western side of the transept, 1 Bede, Vita S. Cuthberti, v. sup. p. 183. 224 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Durham which is their work, is plainer than the other and has no Cathedral The choir now ends in an eastern transept, the "chapel of the Nine Altars," built in a vigorous Early Pointed style. Originally, as might be expected, it finished with an apse, and in 1875 it was discovered that instead of having an ambulatory like Winchester, Canterbury, and Norwich round the central apse, the church ended with three apses like S. Maria in Cosmedin at Rome, and the churches of the Greek rite. The two side apses seem to have been square externally though round within, as is the case at the Euphrasian basilica of Parenzo (v. vol. i. p. 182). The choir The Norman choir had four arches in two double bays east of the crossing : the main piers have attached half-columns, and are elongated as if they were segments of aside wall, and the intermediates are circular with spiral and zigzag flutings. A later bay occupies the place of the Norman apse. The details are plain, though the arches of the main arcade are rather richly moulded, an advance on those of Winchester (Plate CXLIII sup.) which are not moulded at all. The triforium has a moulded in- cluding order over two sub-arches with a central column. The clerestory windows are very plain and in the choir have no mural passage. The design of Carilef's work is continued in the transept (Fig. 131) where some of the original shafts remain, running up to the top of the wall, showing that though the aisles were vaulted the central span was intended to be covered by a wooden roof. The The capitals are all of the cushion type, but those of the cylindrical columns are eight-sided, which makes them deficient in projection, and gives them a curious bluntness of effect. CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 225 Fig. 131. J. A. II. '5 226 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Durham The nave was built by the next bishop, Ralph Flam- ' bard (1099-1 128), and shows an advance in technique on the earlier work. The simple clerestory of Carilef's build- ing is handsomely replaced by a triplet, with a central arch opposite the window, and a narrow arch on each side carried by colonnettes ; the triforium has two including orders instead of one ; and the main arches are enriched with zigzags and other ornaments (Plate CXLVII). They are grouped in double bays, the intermediate columns being cylindrical, and fluted or enriched with The vault channellings in chevrons or chequers. The stone vault, which is thoroughly developed with rib and panel con- struction, is supposed by some to have been finished before H33 1 . I think it more probably dates from the 1 3th century or at the earliest from the time of Bishop Pudsey (1153-1195) the builder of the Galilee. It has many peculiarities. There is a heavy transverse arch divid- ing one double bay from another and between them are two quadripartite vaults with no transverse rib to divide them. The same plan obtains in the transept (Fig. 131). I am not aware of another instance of this arrangement. The great transverse arches are pointed, but they are segmental : the height being given by the side walls and the round arch of the central tower, a pointed arch could only be got by dropping the springing. This again implies that the present vault was not the covering originally contemplated, but that as in the transept a wooden roof was prepared for. 1 Canon Greenwell, Durham Cathedral, 1897, p. 36. He quotes Symeon of Durham, who says the monks completed the nave between the death of Flambard in 1128, and the succession of Galfrid Rufus in 1133. Eo tempore navis ecclesiae Dunelmensis, monachis operi instantibus, peracta est. Symeon, continuatio, Cap. I. Canon Greenwell argues that at the death of Flambard there was nothing but the vault left for them to do, but this seems a large assumption. M. de Lasteyrie shares my doubts and thinks these vaults coeval with those at S. Denis, i.e. 1144. Arch. Rom. p. 497. See further as to this my Gothic Architecture in France, England and Italy, vol. I. p. 184. Plate DURHAM The Nave Plate CXLVIII DURHAM The Galilee CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 227 The Galilee chapel outside the west end, which over- Durham hangs the precipice, and where lie the bones of the Se^ 1 Venerable Bede, shows what the Norman style was Galilee developed into when greater experience and riper con- structive power enabled the builders to design in a lighter style and with more elegance (Plate CXLVIII). It was built by Bishop Pudsey about the year 1175, less than a hundred years after Bishop William laid the first stone of his ponderous arcades, and it shows a fairly rapid advance in architectural skill 1 . Indeed the architect reduced his supports dangerously. Of the present quatrefoil columns (Fig. 132) only the two marble shafts are original, and the stone shafts were added by Cardinal Langley (1406-1437) to strengthen them. The original arrangement remains in the responds, which have the two detached marble shafts without the addition. Some only of the capitals have the abacus broken out over the additional shafts ; several still retain the simple straight abacus belonging to the two marble shafts, like the entablature over the coupled columns at S. Costanza in Rome (v. vol. i. p. 190, Plate XLIV). 1 The names of Bishop Pudsey's architects are recorded, Richard and William. They are called ingeniatores. Greenwell, op. cit. p. 48 15-2 228 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Durham The development of ornament however did not keep pace with that of the architectural form ; in the Galilee ornament arches we have still only the conventional Norman zigzag, and the capitals consist of four plain flat leaves which hardly amount to sculpture. In this respect the work at Durham lags behind that at Canterbury, where by this time Romanesque tradition had almost been forgotten. progress Winchester and Durham between them furnish an f/ nTwin e pit me f Norman Romanesque. The plain unmoulded Chester to orders of Bishop Walkelyn are followed some 20 years later by Bishop William's well-moulded arcades at Durham ; his simpler work is succeeded in less than another 20 years by Bishop Flambard's more ornate and refined work in the nave ; and half a century later Bishop Pudsey's elegant Galilee brings us to the period of tran- sition from Romanesque to lighter Gothic. improved The advance at Durham on the transepts of Winchester Ke rtl n * s sri wn a ls by the infinitely better proportion of the storeys three storeys. At Winchester the triforium and the great arcade are nearly equal in height. At Norwich they seem quite so. At Durham the great arcade is raised at the expense of the upper storeys with a magni- ficent result. In that splendid nave, with its huge towering columns, no artist can stand unmoved. Pittington The interesting church of PITTINGTON, some five or six miles from Durham, is said to have been another work of Bishop Pudsey. The fluted and spirally adorned columns of the nave (Plate CXLIX) seem to have been inspired by the earlier work at Durham, but they are carried out differently. The spirals at Durham are chased into the cylindrical shaft, and do not mar the outline. At Pittington they are left in relief, and the ground is sunk instead, with the result that except where CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 229 the spiral roll reaches it the capital overhangs the shaft pittington disagreeably. The days of this spiral ornament were really over, and the artist trying to do something original in that way has bungled. The capitals even here do not rise above a version of the cushion type (Fig. 133). Fig. 133- The sternest Norman work in England is that of the s. .. i i cathedral Abbey at S. ALBAN'S, of which the earlier part was buil by Abbot Paul between 1077 and 1088. Here there are absolutely no mouldings on the edge of pier and arch. The material employed had no doubt something to do with this, being chiefly brick from the Roman city of Verulam, and the remains of the Saxon church which Elstow Peter- 230 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn Abbot Paul pulled down. Among them are many of the balusters which have already been noticed as peculiar to Saxon architecture. On a smaller scale the same simple unadorned Norman construction is shown in the fine church of ELSTOW near Bedford (Plate CL) where the square-ordered arches spring from a mere impost moulding, without even the usual cushion capital. PETERBOROUGH was not begun till 1 1 1 8, and the nave was not finished till the end of the i2th century. It is Fig. 134- practically a Norman church still, though the primitive style of the nave at a period when elsewhere the style was changing into Early English is apparently an archaicism. The western part of the nave in fact was hardly finished in the Norman style before the well-known west front was begun in the Early Pointed manner. The church is basilican, and ended eastward in three apses like the original plan at Durham. The central apse still exists, though a good deal altered to make it harmonize with the Perpendicular retro-choir at the east end. ELSTOW Plate CIJ GLOUCESTER The Nave CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 231 The details show progress in refinement. The Peter- triforium arches are graceful and prettily decorated, and cSSi the aisle vaults have diagonal as well as transverse ribs of a heavy roll section. The nave retains its painted wooden ceiling of Norman times. The columns are massive and have attached colon - nettes, some of them rising as vaulting shafts, others carrying the several orders of the arches, but in many cases, where the correspondence of order and shaft is not observed, the cushion capitals, which are universal in the Norman part, are broken out for the orders, though the main pier below remains a plain cylinder or octagon (Fig. 134). The lofty proportion of the triforium stage which has been noticed at Winchester and other Norman churches is maintained here, though the gradation of the three storeys is more pleasing at Peterborough. At GLOUCESTER on the other hand, which was begun Gloucester by Abbot Serlo in 1089, and dedicated in noo much greater importance is given to the nave arcade ; it attains a stately proportion at the expense of the triforium, which is diminished to very small coupled lights under an including arch (Plate CLI). The columns are enor- mous cylinders built of small masonry and with plain round capitals, which are neither moulded nor carved, but devoid of any ornamentation. From these capitals all the orders of the arch spring, unprepared for by anything below, and are decorated with plain roll mould- ings, zigzags, and billets. The general effect, if a little severe and cold, is extremely impressive. TEWKESBURY Abbey has the same huge cylindrical Tewkes- columns in the nave, with plain round unornamented capitals, and arches of still simpler detail than those at 232 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvn ' ' - Icwkbbury Fig. 135- CH. xxvn] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 233 Gloucester, and the triforium is quite unimportant, Tewkes- pinched up against the clerestory window-sill. The clerestory however is not original, and the Norman design may have been different. The magnificent west front with its deeply recessed arch of many orders and its two piquant pinnacles, together with the grand central tower over the crossing make this one of the very finest examples of Romanesque architecture in existence (Fig. I35) 1 . HEREFORD and MALVERN have the same massive Hereford cylindrical columns with simple round capitals ; that at Maivem Hereford however having attached shafts on one side and surface carving on the ovolo of the capital. At Malmes- Maimes- bury the round capitals are scolloped in imitation of the Abbey cushion form, and there is a similar capital, still further enriched, at ABBEY DORE in Herefordshire. These cylindrical columns with a plain or nearly plain round capital at Gloucester, Tewkesbury, Malvern, Hereford, Abbey Dore, and Malmesbury, seem to form a distinctive west country type differing in many par- ticulars from the cylindrical columns already noticed at Durham, Norwich, and Waltham, and others at Fountains, Buildwas, and S. Bartholomew's in Smithfield. 1 I am indebted to Mr Raffles Davison for leave to reproduce his beautiful drawing. CHAPTER XXVIII ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD Romsey OF th e two great conventual churches which Hamp- shire boasts in addition to her cathedral, ROMSEY is remarkable among Norman churches for its square east end, which has the further anomaly of containing two windows, so that a pier comes in the middle instead of a light. The same peculiarity exists in the church of the Hospital of S. Cross near Winchester. Christ- The other Hampshire church, the Priory of TWYNHAM priory 1 or CHRISTCHURCH, which is on the scale of a cathedral, was probably begun by Ralph Flambard in the time of William Rufus. The nave and transepts (Plate CLII) of the original building still remain, but the eastern arm and the chapels beyond it were re-built with splendour in the i4th and i5th centuries. There was perhaps a Norman central tower which has disappeared, and a fine i5th century tower has been added at the west end. The aisles are vaulted, and the nave is roofed with wood. The Norman roof was replaced in the I4th century by a handsome one of timber, now much decayed, and hidden by sham vaulting of lath and plaster. The nave piers are very simple, rectangular masses of masonry with attached colonnettes ; and the triforium is divided by a central column into two sub-arches under an including one. The lofty proportion of the triforium here is like that at Winchester, Peterborough, and Ely. Plate citrr CHRISTCHURCH PRIORY North Transept CH. xxvm] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 235 One of the most remarkable features of the Norman work at Christchurch is the round staircase turret (Plate CLIII) at the N.E. angle of the north transept, which is richly decorated not only with arcading, but with roll mouldings in relief, forming a reticulated pattern on the surface, a feature of rare interest, which occurs also at Le Mans in France (v. sup. p. 160, Plate CXXIX). The capitals of the arcades on this buttress form an instructive series of early Norman carving. They have the square abacus and preserve the tradition of the classic volute. The nave of ROCHESTER (Plate CLIV) which, in its Rochester present form, dates from 1115 and onwards, shows an cathedral advanced stage of Norman Romanesque by its clustered piers, in which the shafts correspond to the members of the arch they carry, and by the graceful enrichments of the spandrils of the triforium, or rather the arch which represents the triforium, for it has the peculiarity of being open to the aisle, so that both the lower arch of the nave arcade and that which should belong to a triforium look into the same side aisle, as they do in the Cathedral of Rouen and in S. Lorenzo at Genoa. Professor Willis observes that originally the same peculiarity existed in the Abbaye aux Hommes, at Caen, though the aisles were subsequently vaulted at the level of the lower arches. He suggests that the same arrangement may have been adopted in Lanfranc's cathedral at Canterbury. At Rochester, there being no floor to the triforium, a passage way is formed through the piers at that level. The chapel of S. Mary at GLASTONBURY (Plate CLV), Giaston- which used to be known as S. Joseph's, represents the s. Mary's primitive church supposed to have been built by Joseph of Arimathea 1 . It stands at some distance west of the 1 v. suf. p. 177. 236 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm Giaston- great church, to which it was joined by a Galilee porch. s? r Mary's It was consecrated in 1186 and affords another instance chapel Q f tne conserva ti sm o f the monastic orders ; for while at Canterbury English William was building in a style of advanced transition towards Early English, this chapel at Glastonbury is round-arched and adorned with interlacing Norman arcades, zigzags, and billet mouldings. The capitals alone betray a later taste, for they have discarded the convex outline of Norman work and adopted the concave form, and something of the springing character of the coming cap a crochet of Gothic architecture. The Giaston- same spirit of archaicism shows itself in the architecture y of the great church which was built after this chapel ; for though the arches are pointed, and trefoil cusps appear in the triforium, the mouldings are enriched with the zigzag and billet of the older art. This brings us in fact to the meeting of the two styles, Romanesque and Gothic, and to the end of our period. At Malmesbury, Fountains, and Buildwas though we have the massive cylindrical columns of the Norman period Attach- they carry pointed arches. The round arch neverthe- thTround less lingered on in unconstructional features, in doorheads, windows, and ornamental arcadings. The monks especially loved it best, and clung to it with conservative zeal, though in matters of construction the superior convenience Fountains of the pointed arch could not be denied. At Fountains the clerestory windows are round-arched though the arcade below is pointed. The aisles there are vaulted in a very primitive way, by barrel vaults with their axis at right angles to that of the nave, springing from round arches turned from pier to wall. Castor There is no richer example of late Norman architec- church ture t j ian t j ie tower O f CASTOR church in Northamptonshire Plate CUV ROCHESTER Nave CH. xxvm] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 237 (Plate CJ^VI). The church was dedicated in 1124, as a Castor stone informs us which is built into the south wall of the church chancel 1 . It resembles the later work in the upper storeys of the steeples of S. fitienne at Caen (sup. p. 154, Plate CXXVII) and that at S. Michel des Vaucelles (Plate CXXVIII) and the tower of the south-east transept at Canterbury (Plate CXLI). It will be observed that the ornament however rich is purely conventional, more mason's work than sculptor's. T . PETER'S NOKTHAA11PTON- !i JYorman . Fig. 136. The church of S. PETER at NORTHAMPTON, which s. Peter's, Mr Sharpe dates as early as 1135, but others with more IBp M probability about 1180, is remarkable on many accounts. It is one of the very few instances in northern Gothic architecture where polychrome masonry is used as a mode of decoration. The strong orange-coloured iron-stone of South Northamptonshire is employed in conjunction with white free-stone in bands and alternate voussoirs, with a very happy effect. The church but for its square east end is a perfect basilica (Fig. 136), unbroken by 1 This stone seems not to be in its original place or state. The last numeral is not in relief like the rest but scratched very rudely into the stone. 238 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm s. Peter's, any chancel arch, with round arches on columns, and ampton wooden roofs. The principal columns are quatrefoil in plan, formed of four attached shafts, of which one runs up to take the tiebeams of the trusses, and they once had arches springing from them across the aisle. The inter- mediate columns are cylindrical, with an enriched and Fig. 137- moulded band or ring surrounding them about mid-height. They all have stilted attic bases, which in some cases have toes. The tower (Plate CLVII) at the west end is not in its original state, but was re-built in the i6th century with old materials and not on the original site, but farther eastward, cutting off half of the next double bay. It has Plate CLVI CASTOR Plate CLVII S. PETER'S NORTHAMPTON North- ampton CH. XXVHI] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 239 a magnificent Norman arch of many orders decorated, as s. Peter's, are all the others in the church, with the zigzag. Another richly decorated arch of four rings and a label in the west wall once probably surmounted a west doorway (Fig. 137) : but these rings are now merely inserted flat into the wall over a perpendicular window. Originally they would probably have been recessed as orders. The two western angles of the tower are buttressed each by a group of three round columns running up to the top stage which is of the i6th century. These buttress Columnar columns can hardly have been invented in the i6th cen- k tury when the tower was pulled down and re-built, and in all probability they formed part of the original Norman structure ; but they are so far as I know unique in England, and remind one of those of Notre Dame at Poitiers, and Civray in Poitou (v. sup. Plates C, CI). The clerestory on both sides is handsomely arcaded outside, and the arcades are carried on to the east end which has been reconstructed on the old foundations (Fig. 138) and on a design more or less conjectural 1 . The sculptured capitals of this church are interesting Norman examples of what the early Norman artists could achieve, They are well proportioned, of a convex or cubical shape, and the carving takes the form of surface ornament as it did in Byzantine work. Some of them have figures of animals ; others simple attempts at foliage, quite inartis- tically arranged ; the best are covered with ornament half-way between foliage and strap-work. They have very little ordered arrangement such as classic example 1 History of the Church of S. Peter, Northampton, by the Rev. R. M. Serjeantson. His book contains in an appendix Sir Gilbert Scott's report and account of the various stages of construction and reconstruction. The church is illustrated in Sharpe's Churches of the Nene Valley. 240 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm Fig. 138. CH. xxvm] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 241 would have taught. In the capital shown in this Norman illustration (Fig. 139) there is to be sure a leaf to scul P ture mark the angle, and the beasts are placed symmetrically, but the scroll-work wanders loosely over the surface, and the rudimentary idea of vegetable growth is ignored, for 7 PETER'S NORTHAMPTON. Fig. 139. while most of the sprays branch off as they ought in the direction of the main stem others start from it backwards. In sculpture indeed the Norman school, whether here or in Normandy, lagged far behind those of the South of France and Burgundy, where the remains of Roman art afforded superior instruction. At first it was j. A. II. 16 Norman sculpture Figures in Norman sculpture Animals in Norman sculpture Then- symbolism 242 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm rarely attempted, and the earlier churches seldom got beyond cushion capitals, and billet or dentil mouldings. The next step in advance was the introduction of such simple conventional ornaments as the zigzag, which the carvers soon learned to treat with much skill and refine- ment. The front of CASTLE RISING church in Norfolk affords a pleasing example of this kind of decoration. Nowhere is it so lavishly employed as in the little village church of IFFLEY near Oxford, where its profusion is some- what tedious. The early efforts of the Norman sculptors at the human figure are deplorable, and are like the efforts of the street boy with a piece of chalk on the palings, or shall we say the masterpiece of a post-impressionist painter. I have in former pages observed the same difficulty in dealing with the figure in the Lombard school, and it is only fair to say, that these figures (Plate CLVIII) at WORDWELL in Suffolk are not much worse than those at Cividale in Friuli 1 . The Norman attempts at animals are not much better : they are generally grotesque lions treated herald- ically with tails that branch into foliage, barbarous enough, and showing but little promise at first of future excellence. In the tympanum at STOW LONGA, Huntingdonshire (Plate CLIX), there is a queer figure of a mermaid, with on one side an animal apparently mounting a pedestal or altar, and on the other what seems to be an Agnus Dei. It is attempted to read a symbolic meaning in these sculptures, but without much success. That at Wordwell has been variously interpreted to mean the sacrament of marriage, Christ giving the benediction, or Edward the Confessor and the pilgrim, and the same 1 I have to thank Mr Keyser for Plates CLVIII, CLIX, and CLX from his work on Norman Tympana and Lintels in Great Britain. CH. xxvm] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 243 license of interpretation may be accorded to most of the Norman others. Subjects from the Old or New Testament are sometimes attempted with miserable success, and now and then the design seems based on Byzantine example. It will be observed, as for instance in the door-head from Stow Longa, how far superior in technique the purely architectural ornament is to the sculpture in the tympanum. Fig. 140. The capitals gradually grew from the simple cushion . . A r ^v . mentofthe type into something more artistic. At nrst the ornament cushion was treated superficially like the cubical Byzantine capitals, of which the example given already from S. Peter's, Northampton, is a favourable instance. In many cases the ornament is applied without any con- structive idea whatever. In the example from Castor (Fig. 140) there is no attempt to express decoratively the form and function of a capital, but the figures are placed on the surface anyhow ; a leaf finishes one angle 1 6 2 Uncon- structive sculpture 244 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm with nothing to balance it on the other, and on the left- hand capital is an ill-designed piece of foliage at one corner with no resemblance to nature and no relation to anything. Nothing could be much more barbarous. An early rudimentary attempt to decorate the cushion capital is shown by Fig. 141 from ELY, where the corners are adorned by a very abstract form of leaf with a simple scroll turn-over. This is said to be part of Abbot Enrich- ment of the cushion capital Fig. 141. Simeon's work, but though nothing could well be simpler it is more advanced than anything by his brother at Winchester. There are precisely similar angle leaves in the capitals of Ernulfs crypt at Canterbury. The next step was to break up the cushion by fluting it, which marked a decided advance ; and then the semi- circular ends of the cushion so divided were decorated by sunk carving as at Ludlow, in the arcading of the CH. xxvm] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 245 round chapel (Fig. 142). In addition the abacus was often enriched by diapers as at S. Peter's BEDFORD (Fig. 143) where also the shaft and the arch mould are decorated with spiral and zigzag mouldings studded with little jewel-like bosses. Later as in Peter de Leia's nave Norman sculpture at S. DAVID'S (1176-1198) the divided cushion capital lost its convex form, and curled over on a concave line, Abandon- the different divisions becoming almost stalks of vegetable growth ; and the next step was to treat the rounded end as a plaque for sculpture (Fig. 144), suppressing the stalk altogether and substituting real foliage, in which Norman sculpture 246 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm appears that curious Early English trefoil leaf, of which I have never seen an example beyond these shores, except at Bayeux. In conventional ornaments, such as diapers and panelling, the Normans showed great skill and ingenuity. Nothing in this way can be better than the ornament of the blank arch on the west face of S. Peter's tower at Northampton (Fig. 137), which has been referred to already. Fig. 144. Gradually, though slowly, the school of Norman sculpture advanced to better things, and towards the end of the 1 2th century we find it more nearly abreast of the Barfreston other schools. The splendid doorway at BARFRESTON (Plate CLX) in Kent was probably carved by workmen from Canterbury cathedral, where Romanesque architec- ture was already giving way to the pointed style. The capital, of which the four sides are shown by Plate CLX I, was lately taken out of the south aisle wall of WIN- CHESTER cathedral, where it had been used by William of Wykeham as a plain facing stone with the carved part inwards. Its finish is remarkable, almost like that of Capital from Win Chester BAR I'latc CLX MMJI& "A ^ WM^^M ' X 2*^tr./-*= -^ .v../flfcr\ J CH. xxvmj ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 247 an ivory carving, and allowing for the grotesque element Capitals in the fabulous creatures represented, they are well modelled. Another capital (Fig. 145), which was built into the wall in the same way with the carved part inwards, shows a refinement of the cushion capital, the sides being shaped Fig. 145. into a trefoil, of which the planes are cleverly managed. Fig. 146 shows a very similar capital from Ernulf and Conrad's crypt at Canterbury. These two capitals at Winchester being carved on all four sides and prepared for slender colonnettes about 6J inches in diameter, may very likely have belonged to the original cloister of the abbey, though their style is much Sym- bolism in sculpture 248 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm later than that of Walkelyn's arches which opened from the cloister to the chapter-house 1 . The centaur shooting an arrow into the monster's mouth is said to be symbolical. One explanation is that it means the " Harrowing of Hell." Sagittarius is an emblem of Christ and the dragon's mouth is Hell-mouth. CANTEKBDKY CRYf*T Fig. 146. In the Livre des Creatures of Philip de Taun, written in the 1 2th century, Sagittarius drawing his bow is said to 1 These carvings were discovered when the stones were drawn out to afford bond for my new buttresses in 1912. Wykeham's perpendicular facing of this wall is no doubt full of similar relics of the work of his predecessors. According to tradition the cloisters were destroyed in Queen Elizabeth's time : if so Wykeham may have pulled down the Norman cloister and built a new one, which was in its turn destroyed in the i6th century. ci.xi WINCHESTER CH. xxvm] ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 249 express Christ's vengeance on the Jews, and his arrow Symbolism points the way his spirit departs through Hell-mouth to sculpture the spirits in prison 1 . This far-fetched and confused theory at all events does not explain the griffin in this capital, who is shot in the chest, nor the trident with which the other monster is defending himself. One wonders whether most of this far-fetched symbolism was not invented by clerics to give a meaning to the sculptor's fancies, and whether the sculptor had anything Fig. 147. in his mind but a sporting subject. And yet it is curious that the centaur shooting into a dragon's mouth, as at Kencott in Oxfordshire (Fig. 147), should be of not uncommon occurrence. In Mr Keyser's collection of Norman door-heads however there are many subjects with Sagittarii and other archers, which seem to have no symbolic mean- ing whatever. There is a Sagittarius in the portal of S. Gilles in Provence which has been illustrated above i Papers by Mr George C. Druce in the Archaeological Journal, voL LXVL No. 264 and 2nd series, vol. XVI. No. 4, PP- 3" 33 8 - 250 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm (sup. p. 70, Plate CVI) who is shooting at an innocent stag ; it would be difficult to draw any moral from that. The centaurs in Romanesque sculpture are among the barbarous figures which S. Bernard ridicules 1 . It is clear he attached no symbolical value to them. Rochester The west doorway at ROCHESTER (Plate CLXII) west door mar k s t h e highest level to which Norman architectural sculpture attained. The logical correspondence of jamb to arch is recognized by the shafts below their respective orders, and the execution of the ornament shows the work of a skilled hand. The attenuated figures of Henry I and his queen, or perhaps Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, which serve as shafts to the inner order resemble those of the western portals at Chartres which are a little later, and those in the chapter-house doorway at S. Georges de Boscherville in Normandy (sup. p. 152, Plate CXXVI) which would perhaps be contemporary. The tympanum is occupied by a figure of Christ in an imperfect vesica supported by an angel on each side and the apocalyptic beasts. A frieze of little figures along the lintel resembles in miniature the arrangement at S. Gilles, V^zelay, and Aries. Christ in In Saxon architecture the representation of Christ on sculpture the cross is common, but in the earlier Norman sculpture any direct representation of our Lord seems to have been studiously avoided. It occurs in later examples as in the two last illustrations, but for the most part in earlier work Christ is represented by a symbol, a lamb carrying a cross, or even by a simple cross as for instance at Hawksworth in Nottinghamshire, where on the two extreme crosses are carved the figures of the thieves, but 1 Quid ibi immundae simiae ? Quid feri leones ? Quid monstruosi centauri? Quid semi-homines? Quid maculosae tigrides ? Pro deo! si non pudet ineptiarum, cur vel non piget expensarum ? Apologia ad Guillelmum Theodorici abbatem, Cap. XII. Plate CLXIJ ROCHESTER Plate CLXIH MALMESBURY ABBEY South Porch CH. xxvmj ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD 251 between them is a plain cross with no figure on it 1 . It will be remembered that the same unwillingness to attempt the divine portraiture was characteristic of the earlier Byzantine work 2 . MALMESBURY has a magnificently sculptured porch of Sculpt late Norman work with figures of the apostles, six on a side, and in the tympanum of the doorway a figure of Christ, in a vesica supported by angels. The figures have draperies with thin folds, much convoluted, and an attempt has evidently been made to give them variety of attitude and expression (Plate CLXIII). Local tradition has it that the sculptures of the apostles are older than the doorway, and some have thought them to be Saxon. I see no reason to doubt their being of the same date as the rest of the porch. The figure of Christ in the head of the doorway has the same convoluted drapery, and the hand is turned back in the same impossible way as those of the apostles. The attempt at greater naturalism speaks of a more advanced stage of art, and is inconsistent with an earlier date than the middle of the i2th century. There are other examples of early sculpture in the fagade of Lincoln cathedral, and on slabs that have been found at Chichester, which from their style probably belong to the end of the nth or to the I2th century, though they have been supposed by some to be earlier. The Prior's door at ELY (Plate CLXIV) is a very Sculpture beautiful piece of late Norman work. In the tympanum is the same subject as at Rochester, and the arch is enriched with many devices of scrolls and interlacing ornaments, among which small figure subjects are intro- duced. The flat border of foliage surrounding the arch is reminiscent of Byzantine design. 1 Keyser, op. cit. Plate 94. * v> sup. vol. I. pp. 41, 114. 252 ENGLAND NORMAN PERIOD [CH. xxvm The bases of the jamb shafts rest on what are now decayed projecting blocks of stone, but which seem at first sight to have been little lions like those in the portals of S. Maria Maggiore at Toscanella. With the help however of the 1 8th century illustration in Bentham's Ely they resolve themselves into a group on each side, consisting of a lion placed parallel to the wall, not project- ing from it in the Italian fashion, and squatting on his back is a naked human figure with his back outwards, embracing the colonnette with his arms. This quasi- Italian feature is so far as I know unique in England. Pecu- In conclusion it remains to point out a few peculiarities of English m English Romanesque, which gradually converted into a 2*" distinct national style t>ne originally imported from across the channel. The It has been already observed that the continental type of church was apsidal, and this was the type the Normans brought with them to this country. Canterbury, Norwich, Peterborough, and Gloucester still have their apses, though the last named conceals it under later work. Ely, Durham, Carlisle, Chester, Chichester, and Worcester, Winchester, Lichfield, Hereford, Exeter, and S. Alban's, though now squarely ended, originally finished in an apse, as is proved by the crypts of some and foundations that have been discovered in others. Rochester seems to have been planned by Gundulph with a square end, we know not why, and S. David's cathedral, Romsey, S. Cross, and S. Prides wide's at Oxford were also so planned, and possibly Southwell. All the rest just named were once apsidal, but when in later times alteration or re-building was called for the continental apse gave way to the square end of the Saxon and the Celt before him. Plate C/.X/l' ELY The Prior's Door CH. xxvm] ENGLISH ROMANESQUE 253 Originally only the aisles were vaulted. Ely still has Aisles only its wooden roof over nave and transept, Winchester over vaulted the transepts, and Peterborough has the old Norman ceiling with painted decoration. It was left for the succeeding age to accomplish the vaulting of a nave. One remarkable feature of the English cathedral or Length of abbey church is its great length, which forms a distinctive SSL characteristic of the national style as compared with that of France. It is no doubt less marked in the earlier work than the later, when the choirs of Canterbury and Winchester were lengthened by Prior Ernulf and Bishop de Lucy. But it is not the length of the choirs more than that of the naves that makes our great cathedrals remarkable. Abroad there are no such long drawn naves in proportion to the church as those of S. Alban's, Ely, Norwich, and Winchester. This may be accounted for by the peculiar constitution of our ecclesiastical establish- ments. In England there was no antagonism between English the bishops and the regular clergy such as that we have aiJo 0ps noticed in France. Here alone the two were united ; the abbots bishop was not only the pastor of his diocese but the head or abbot of the convent or college, and the abbey church was his cathedral. The great church of each diocese Lay part consequently was shared between the monks and the townsmen ; a solid wall pierced by a door in the centre divided it into two parts, and the eastern part was the monks' choir, while the people had the nave for their church with its own altar against the screen. Nowhere can this arrangement be observed better than at Christ- church Priory, but the choir screen remains still in those of our cathedrals which have not suffered from the mischievous craze of throwing everything open to be seen at a glance from end to end. 254 ENGLISH ROMANESQUE [CH. xxvm This I take it explains the long drawn naves of our English minsters. Effect in The connexion of the bishops with the monasteries Suihes e has no doubt been the means of saving the buildings. At the suppression of the convents in the i6th century those abbey churches which were also cathedrals were of course spared, for episcopacy was not threatened : those which like Peterborough were made the seat of new bishoprics were also preserved for that reason. A few others like Bath, Malvern, and Christchurch were given to the people for parish churches, but with these and similar exceptions most of the old abbeys are now in ruins. Progress In tracing the progress of refinement in English archi- Romanesque from the bald and featureless simplicity of the nave of S. Alban's in 1077 to the elegance of the Galilee at Durham in 1175, and the chapel of S. Mary at Glastonbury ten years later, we shall find that it was most rapid towards the end of the period. For the first eighty or ninety years after the conquest, while the whole face of the land was being covered with buildings in the new style, it changed very little. Between the transepts of Winchester in 1079 and those of Peterborough nearly a century later the difference is much less than might have been looked for. And yet before the nave of Peter- borough was finished the Temple church in London was consecrated, a work of pronounced transitional character with pointed arches, and ten years later Bishop Hugh of Avalon built his choir at Lincoln, which bears no trace whatever of Romanesque architecture, or of any French influence. When the change came the old style melted away rapidly enough, but for a long while the Norman style went on with but little sign of further development. In comparing English cathedral churches with those CH. xxvm] ENGLISH ROMANESQUE 255 of France we find in our own a greater variety, and a variety of greater freedom both in plan and design. If one runs over in memory the general form of our great churches their diversity will seem surprising. Durham, Canter- bury, Lincoln, and York have each three towers, but they are not in the least like one another. Wells also has three, but the west front in which two of them are placed is unique. The long low line of Peterborough suits its position in the level fen country, and its great west front has no parallel in Gothic art. The three spires of Lich- field and the two transeptal towers of Exeter are unmistakeable, and so are the central towers of Gloucester, Worcester, and Hereford, and the steeples of Chichester, Salisbury, and Norwich. No other school can show so great and so wide a variety in general mass and outline. Nobody can for a moment mistake one of these buildings for another, whereas at a brief glance one may be forgiven for doubting whether a photograph represents the portals of Amiens, Rheims, or Paris, the cathedrals of Sens or Auxerre, or the fa9ades of Siena or Orvieto. Generally speaking Romanesque architecture came to End of an end in England in the last quarter of the i2th century. Roman- Bishop Godfrey de Lucy began his presbytery at e Winchester in the early English style in 1202, or perhaps a few years sooner. More than 20 years before then William of Sens had re-built the choir at Canterbury, in which the pointed arch was used for the main arcade, though the round arch was retained elsewhere ; and English William finished the eastern part in 1184, where the pointed arch finally triumphed. But the round arch made a hard fight for it, and was given up with reluctance, especially by the monastic orders. We find it at Glaston- bury in conjunction with foliaged capitals of a Gothic type. 256 ENGLISH ROMANESQUE [CH. xxvm In S. LEONARD'S PRIORY at STAMFORD (Plate CLXV) we have it zigzags and all associated with the slender shafts and capitals of the I3th century, and in the very similar west door of KETTON church, a few -miles away, the side arches that are round at S. Leonard's have become pointed, while the central doorway retains its semi-circular head 1 . Many instances of the same kind are to be found throughout the length and breadth of the land, often creating problems as to the date of a building to provoke the antagonism of archaeologists. Extent of Never perhaps was there a time when so great a arch^ an burst of architecture took place as in the period we have been considering. The Norman style has left its mark on the majority of our cathedrals and parish churches to this day. Many of them are almost wholly in that style, and if we except Wells whence all Norman work has disappeared, and Salisbury which was built in post- Norman times, there is perhaps none of our cathedrals in which Norman work does not play an important part, while there are very few village churches without at least a Norman doorway, or a chancel arch, or perhaps only a window slit that dates from Romanesque times. Every- where do we still see evidences of what William of Malmesbury tells us was going on in his day. " Nearly all," he says, "try to rival one another in sumptuous buildings of the style which Edward the Confessor had first introduced into this country. Everywhere you may see in villages churches, in towns monasteries rising in the new style of building." 1 Ketton is illustrated in Parker's Rickman, ed. 1848, p. 85. CHAPTER XXIX CONCLUSION IN the preceding pages we have traced the rise and Summary development of a new art in eastern and western Europe, based on the style of the old Roman world, but following widely different principles, which led it ever farther and farther from the parent art. In the Empire of EASTERN ROME the basilican plan Byzantine of Constantine's time gradually yielded to the influence tecture of the art of the Asiatic provinces. The wooden roof gave way to covering with stone or brick, which after many tentative experiments resulted in the adoption of construc- tion by pendentives, and the mighty dome of S. Sophia at Constantinople. New forms of decoration were invented. Sculpture was relegated to subordinate functions and con- fined to capitals, friezes, and purely architectural features. Painting, and above all mosaic, together with linings of precious marbles gave the walls a loveliness all their own. The decline of native art in ITALY was followed by a itaio- gradual revival when Byzantine art passed across the a S tir Adriatic: its adoption began at Ravenna with the tecture buildings of Honorius and Galla Placidia ; it advanced further under Theodoric and his Gothic kingdom; and it was fully developed after the conquest of Justinian and the establishment of the exarchate, when the dome made its appearance at S. Vitale. j. A. ii. '7 258 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE [CH. xxix Under the Lombards and Franks art declined, and Venice reached its bathos in the 8th century. Venice alone adhered to the Eastern Empire, and kept Byzantine art alive in Italy. When, with the rise of the Communes the Rise of country began to enjoy a freer and more prosperous life, esque an art revived also, but took a fresh line and became what tecture we know as Romanesque instead of Byzantine. In the duomo of Pisa, S. Miniato at Florence, the cathedral of Zara in Dalmatia, and the churches of Lucca and Rome the basilican plan reasserts itself, and in S. Ambrogio at Milan we find it combined with vaulting on a grand scale over both nave and aisles, a step which removed the last weakness of basilican architecture. The old ranks of columns had to be superseded by more solid piers, wider arches took the place of narrow intercolumniations, and this paved the way for all future development. German From Italy Romanesque architecture passed the Alps i nto GERMANY, where we find versions of the Lombard tower, and in the churches on the Rhine the galleried apses of Lucca and Como. Charlemagne's attempt to introduce the Byzantine plan was not successful ; his domed church at Aix-la- Chapelle had no following in Gaul or Austrasia, and the German church is basilican. French In FRANCE, the most classic of all provinces of the S^e 11 " Roman Empire, Roman example inspired the rising art of the period that followed the barbarian settlement. But in each province of the disunited kingdom Roman- esque art fell into separate schools. Provence In Provence it obeyed the influence of the Roman art in which the province abounded ; and sculpture, with good models to follow, attained a high degree of excellence. CH. xxix] BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE 259 In Aquitaine, on the line of trade with the Levant, we find the construction influenced by the Byzantine school, which inspired the domed churches of Pe"rigueux, Angouleme, Solignac, and the rest of that group, and reached Le Puy in the Auvergne. Burgundy was the seat of monasticism, and from the Burgundy cloistered workshops of Cluny and the Cluniac monasteries not only in France but beyond its borders arose a school of architecture which affected the art far and wide. It was from Burgundy that architecture was carried Normandy into Normandy, where a school arose owing less than any other to Roman example, following a line of its own, robust and virile, deficient in sculpture for want of ancient example, and dependent on simple constructional forms and mass for effect. From Normandy this art passed with the conquest English into England, where it speedily suppressed and almost wiped out the Saxon architecture of the conquered race, which though it had a certain national character possessed little vitality and showed little promise of further pro- gress. The history of Romanesque architecture was in- TWO fluenced by two opposite principles ; on the one hand ancient Roman example held the artists fast-bound, as esque far as it could, to precedent; on the other the neces- sities and possibilities of the time drove them into novel experiments, and made an ever widening breach between their work and their models. In Italy, as was Roman art . T T> *ke mo " e l natural, Roman tradition was strongest. It was Koman O f Roman- art which Charlemagne's renaissance attempted to revive e in Gaul and Austrasia. To build in the manner of the Romans was the ambition of our Saxon forefathers. The Roman round arch gave way to the pointed only 172 260 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE [CH. xxix under stress of constructional difficulties, and the builders loved it best, and used it in decorative features even where they had to give it up in the main fabric. Byzantine It must be confessed that in respect of originality R?man- tO tms clinging to the antique places the Romanesque schools esque in below the Byzantine. The eastern school was influenced originality * from another direction, and looked for inspiration to oriental sources rather than to Rome. The Byzantine churches of the 5th century are already far removed from Roman example, of which there can hardly be said to exist any trace whatever in Justinian's buildings at Constantinople and in the Exarchate. The long-drawn basilica from that time disappeared east of the Adriatic, and gave way to the square church, grouped round a central dome ; the classic orders were forgotten, and decorative sculpture assumed forms that were quite novel in character. In the east the breach with the past was deliberate and voluntary ; but in the west, the change to which Romanesque art was inevitably committed by the necessities of a new state of society, and the absence of either means or skill to continue the art which it was desired to imitate, was involuntary and possibly at first to some extent unconscious on the part of the artist. The remains of Roman work were still his model. He had no other, and widely as his work differed from the antique it was strongly affected by it from first to last. Restraint The surviving influence on Romanesque architecture of its classic origin may be seen in a certain restraint which was lost in the succeeding styles of the i3th and 1 4th centuries. Roman architecture was eminently a sane and orderly architecture, in which there was no room for daring flights of imagination, or desperate revolts CH. xxix] BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE 261 from precedent. And the Romanesque style which sprang from it inherited a sobriety and simplicity which distinguishes it from the Gothic art of the following period. The masses of its buildings are plain and solid, with plenty of bare wall-face, and none of that efflorescence into airy pinnacles, niches and canopies, open traceries and tabernacle work, from which, in the fervour of the early Renaissance, Vasari prays heaven to defend us 1 . The contrast is that of Pisa with Milan, Worms with Cologne, Roman- Angouleme and Ve"zelay with Amiens and Rheims, and Gothic 11 the nave of Gloucester with its choir. Not that Roman- com P ared esque could not be splendid enough and indulge in ornament as well as Gothic : the fronts of Angouleme, Notre Dame at Poitiers, and Civray are as richly decorated as those of Paris or Rouen, but the ornament is economised and used with discretion. In point of technique and execution no doubt Roman- Romanesque sculpture must yield to the later school ; in the statuary at Aries and S. Gilles with all its dignity of expression it must be confessed there is something archaic, a trace of barbarism, which prevents its ranking with the figures at Chartres, Rheims, and Paris, some of which are comparable to the antique. But in other respects the comparison is not all in favour of the later work. Viollet-le-Duc 2 indeed, as we have already ob- served, compares the portal of S. Trophime disadvan- tageously with that of the Virgin at Paris, which is only 1 ...facevano una maledizione di tabernacolini 1' un sopra 1' altro, con tante piramidi e punte e foglie che non ch' elle possano stare, pare impossible ch' elle si possano reggere. Ed hanno piu il modo da parer fatte di carta che di pietre o di marmi Iddio scampi ogni paesi da venir a tal pensiero ed ordine di \a.vor\...Proemio delt Architettura. Raffaelle writes to Pope Leo X in the same strain. 2 Diet. Rais. voL vii. p. 419- 262 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE [CH. xxix s. few years later in date ; but as architectural compositions the Romanesque portals are in many respects saner than the more luxuriant portals of the succeeding style. The excellence of the details, especially of the sculpture, in the later school makes one forget some absurdities. For French surely there is something absurd in the conventional portais French portal, where little figures in niches that ought to be upright, standing on pedestals that lean at an angle of 45, come toppling over one's head in a succession of concentric orders with an admired disregard of the laws of gravity. In the Romanesque doorways the figures stand, as they should, upright, and the arches as a rule Compared are simply moulded. At Angoul^me and Civray it is true Roman- angels on the wing do circle round the arches, and so do portals l^ 6 fig ures f saints in the doorway at Lincoln, but they are carved in relief on the arch stones, and not housed in tabernacles that tumble overhead ; while in the later French portals of this kind, the figures are often actually detached and hung up by metal hooks 1 . This mode of treating the French portal with niches and little figures in them round the arches, once invented, lasted through the middle ages and becomes at last tedious. It gives a brilliancy by affording sharp points of light and shadow, and so produces a picturesque effect, but I think after a candid comparison of the two we must admit that the Romanesque portals are more reasonable, and therefore more in keeping with true artistic principles, influence In Italy the contrast is not so observable, for the on Italian Gothic style when it did make its way there was more subdued. Milan after all is exceptional, a product of the arte Tedesca, for it was begun under German in- fluence ; the great churches of Assisi, and even those > v. Viollet-le-Duc, Diet. Rats. vol. I. p. 53. . CH. xxix] BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE 263 of Siena and Orvieto are comparatively simple in mass and outline, and their splendour is confined to the sculptured and inlaid fronts. One would think that Roman tradition, descending through the Romanesque period, still laid a restraining hand on extravagance of design. The vitality of classic tradition as expressed by the classic Romanesque work both in France and Italy is remarkable. ' In Italy indeed it never really died out, nor in the Italian speaking cities of Dalmatia, but lasted through the Gothic period till it met the returning flood of classic at the Renaissance. The apse of the cathedral of Lucca (v. Plate LXIX, vol. i. p. 251), erected after 1320, is purely Romanesque, and but for the foliage of its capitals, might have been built two hundred years earlier ; while the upper part of the front of the cathedral at Zara, which was finished in Pisan Romanesque in the i5th century, is coeval with the chapels of Eton and King's College. Classic details appear in Italian architecture all through the middle ages. The fine scrolls on the portal of the Baptistery at Pisa (Plate LXXIV, vol. i. p. 258) might have been cut by a Roman chisel, and on the Gothic pulpit in the same building, made by Nicola Pisano in 1 260, the classic egg and dart appears, while the sculptured panels are distinctly based on Roman models. In France abundant examples have been given classic already of the survival of classic influence, especially in the south, where Roman remains were frequent, and perhaps some Greek traditions lingered. But even in the north it held its own, and the scroll (Fig. 148) on the west portal at Mantes, which dates from the end of the 1 2th century, is a nearer imitation of the Roman type than that at Lucca (vol. I. p. 255, Fig. 58) while the Classic influence weak in English Roman- esque 264 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE [CH. xxix capitals of the interior are as Corinthian in motive as those of Avallon or Ve"zelay. The Roman- esque of Nor- mandy and Eng- land, for reasons that have been already explained, shows but little trace of classic in- fluence except in its stubborn ad- herence to the round arch, due mainly to the na- tural conservatism of the monastic orders. There is a much closer connexion with Roman work m the preceding Saxon style as shown for in- stance at Brad- ford-on-Avon (PI. CXXXVIII, p. 195 sup.). And when the pointed arch finally tri- umphed the Eng- Fig. 148. lish architect could hardly make his arches pointed enough ; there is nothing CH. xxix] BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE 265 beyond the seas like our sharpest lancet work ; and our adoption of the round abacus put an end to all possible imitation of the Corinthian capital, which lasted longer in France where the square abacus was retained. In constructional skill the Romanesque builders were Un- of course far behind their successors in the i3th, i4th and i5th centuries, when construction had become scientific, no problem of masonry was left unsolved, and the due esque equilibrium of forces was understood and skilfully em- ployed. The earlier men made up for what they wanted in skill by solidity of mass ; but in spite of their enormous piers and thick walls their towers fell, and their barrel vaults pushed their walls out and had to be sustained in later ages by flying buttresses and other devices. But inferior as they are in science, the solidity of Romanesque buildings with their sturdy columns and massive propor- tions will often satisfy the artist eye better than the more slender and ingenious constructions of a later day, when the architect economised substance almost as closely as the engineer. In actual execution apart from constructive skill Excellence Romanesque work compares favourably with Gothic, esque Their materials were well selected, as the durability of their work attests, both in England and France. In this respect Viollet-le-Duc considers Romanesque work in France superior to Gothic of the latter he says that " the architecture is no longer executed with that minute care in the details, with that attention to the choice of materials which strikes us in buildings of the end of the 1 2th century, when the lay architects were still imbued with monastic traditions. If we set aside some rare Hasty con- edifices like the S. Chapelle at Paris, like the cathedral J*^ at Rheims, like certain parts of the cathedral of Paris, we Gothic 266 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE [CH. xxix Hasty con- shall find that the monuments of the i$th century are of French often as careless in their execution as they are cleverly designed in the system of their construction. There was much to be done, done promptly, and done with little money ; the builders are in a hurry to enjoy, they neglect foundations ; they raise monuments rapidly, using all sorts of materials, good or bad, without taking time to choose. They snatch the stones from the masons' hands half dressed, with unequal joints, and hasty filling in. The constructions are brusquely interrupted, as brusquely begun again with great changes of design. One finds no more that leisurely wisdom of the masters belonging to the regular orders, who did not begin a building till they had collected their materials long before, and chosen them carefully ; and had provided money sufficient, and ripened their plans by study 1 ." NO such This contrast between the execution of Romanesque E?gn!i m an d Gothic building does not I think occur in England. In my own experience I have generally found the early English masonry as good as the Norman, and the mortar much better. I have dwelt upon one guiding principle of Roman- esque architecture, that attachment to precedent which to a certain extent tied the artists down to the imitation, so far as they could manage it, of ancient example. It remains to notice the opposite principle, which is after all the more vital one, which tended to break with the past, and converted what began on mere imitative lines into a new, original, and living art. Reason It is the same principle which lies at the root of all lecture" development of architectural styles ; the principle of recognizing change of circumstance, and accommodating 1 V.-le-Duc, Diet. Rats. vol. I. p. 150. CH. xxix] BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE 267 the art of the day to satisfy and express it In novel Reason requirements, in new and better appliances, the architect Sctire' finds his happiest sources of inspiration, and the most fertile suggestions for artistic invention. The old Roman architecture had become impossible in the 5th and 6th centuries and indeed sooner than that, and the builders had to do the best they could in other ways. New modes of construction had to be devised, and this necessarily led to new forms of design : for at the root of all radical changes in architecture will be found some reason of construction. Adopting the arch as the main element of design the Arch con- masters of the new style carried it much farther than the s Romans, from whom they took it. Instead of reducing it to a passive weight-carrying feature they made it an active member of the structure, opposing vault to vault, thrust to thrust, and thus beginning that method of construction by equilibrium of forces which was the motive principle of all succeeding architecture during the middle ages. This new motive pervaded the architecture so as to remodel its outward form. The old Roman Roman use of the orders as an unmeaning surface decoration abandoned was forgotten. The column, from being a mere surface decoration as at the Colosseum, was again brought into service, and we see it doing duty as a working member of construction in the arcades of S. Sophia, the colon- nades of the basilicas at Salonica and Ravenna, and the churches of Pisa, Lucca, and Genoa. This again gave way to a different form of construction as the art of The vault vaulting wider spaces was gradually acquired, and stronger piers and wider arches replaced the basilican colonnade. Thenceforth the vault was the dominant factor in all the schools of Romanesque art and of the Gothic that followed, 268 BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE [CH. xxix and from the exigencies of that form of construction arose all the later schools of western Europe. classic Byzantine and Romanesque art was in fact a revulsion vention from convention to the unaffected expression of natural doned ^ aw an< ^ met hds f construction. It does not appeal to all minds alike. To those who value consistent obedience to authority and precedent, to strict canons of orthodoxy, correctness, and propriety, according to certain accepted formulas ; in other words in the strict classic purist both Byzantine and Romanesque art will appear debased and lawless, a violation of all rule, and a rebellion against wholesome tradition. To others not so wedded to authority it will appear the natural and reasonable out- come of an altered state of society, to which the old Roman architecture would be inappropriate had it not been impossible. Byzantine Neither Romanesque nor Byzantine architecture can Roman- ^ e regarded as perfected styles ; they are rather to be stvies'of v i ewe d as styles in transition. Romanesque, especially transition ' m Northern Europe, never shook off the roughness of the barbarous time out of which it came, and of which the thorns and briers clung to it to the last. Byzantine indeed, in its splendid earlier stages almost attained perfection of a kind ; but its development was arrested, and it had begun to fall into decay before it was over- whelmed by the Moslem conquests. But Romanesque, struggling upwards through its imperfections, had a stronger life and was more fruitful of consequences ; and after an Herculean infancy it developed at last into that Gothic architecture which was the glory of the middle ages. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF ARCHITECTURAL EXAMPLES Buildings that no longer exist are in italics BYZANTINE 324. FOUNDATION OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Constantine's churches of Irene and the Apostles. Church at Bethlehem. 350-360. S. Giorgio, Salonica. A round church, domed, with mosaics. 360. S. Sophia, Constantinople, dedicated. A basilica built by Emp. Constantius, foundations laid 34 years before. 379-395- Constantinople. Theodosius I's pedestal to the obelisk of Thothmes II I, with sculptures in tolerable classic style. 413. Constantinople. The inner wall, by Theodosius II. 425. Eski Djouma, Salonica. Basilica. Columns with pulvino, and mosaic in arches &c. 447. Constantinople. The double wall and Porta Aurea. ITALIAN AND ITALO-BYZANTINE 300-305. Spalato. Diocletian's palace. Classic with many irregularities. Some materials second-hand. 312. Constantine's triumphal arch in regular Roman classic. Debased sculpture. Reliefs partly taken from older monuments. 313. EDICT OF MILAN. Toleration of Christianity. 330. St Peter's, Rome. A five-aisled basilica built by Constantine. 335. S. Costanza, Rome, built as a tomb- house for the Princess Constantia. S. Lorenzo f. le Mura, Rome, the eastern church by Constantine. Much restored in 588 by Pelagius II. 353. Rome. S. Maria Maggiore, re-built 432- 380. S. Paolo f. le Mura, Rome, re-built on the present plan. Burnt 1823 and since re-built. RAVENNA MADE THE CAPITAL. The Ursian Cathedral. A five- aisled basilica destroyed in 1734. The Ursian Baptistery. SACK OF ROME BY ALARIC. 425. S. Giov. Evangelista, Ravenna, by Galla Placidia. Since raised. S. Agata Ravenna, do., do. 425. S. Sabina, Rome. 425-430. Baptistery, Ravenna. Mosaics added by Archbp. Neon. S. Maria Maggiore, Rome, re-built by Sixtus III. 432. S. Lorenzo f. le Mura, Rome. western church, now the nave, by Sixtus III, v. 1216. Death of Galla Placidia. Her 404. 410. 432- The 450. mausoleum at Ravenna. 270 .2S X H ~ c& > 4- r* 1 ? ^ _, rt t> .? -> O'S H r C5 - * -' - 1 z W .^ "** -^> ^ " K 8 ^ w^ ^> o 0?^ jr '-^N -VI^'C ^gcrf ^vl. * .VS.' > )-i'*" M 3 N ^5 I O fc *Z *"O KA /^ ci iJT C 4^ rl ' J* 25^oS^'i>."> o oc c~* n < m fl "S SoS;* *9 S o} - -"K >, v Ui''S(DtcJP^P rsHfVi S C . fli > M Jr _*! I M ^* Q *, - < C/5 f^^KM OS 3 u-> ^ w S W bo < .^sO^ 53 H 0-1= V2 ^^.^fi W Um 1 ' .S -^ S 43 ' to ^ S a '" r^ "T^ . ?* r T2 Z < N QQ C 43 5 O OT3 U 2 271 gc^ - 4^-5 -1 ^ o J.-0-i * nil I 113 I: 1 flJJr 3 <<2-5 . ^^ S 3.5 S bS 1 " ^^?"^^ ^S 8"^ *+&". OCJJ-T3 i^^t;>*'' :; >k] > ^> - OT 2v rtC ^ ^i3 I lijl i8pii^ii:^ii!i J" ^ p ^ 2 ^ ^^2)^ ri^ i^ p rf-g 8'i 'S 272 | $ ^ ll^f 8- ^1 .<, ENGLISH it i* ii| ttiTfi I* 'a S 5 _Q > s ** c "T3 11 I ifPHJII* . ^ -S P3 C O i^Vo SK"^ O r* M PQ fl oo ^ rt o Q OS *i^iij c ' ^ "" oo oo oo ^* """ oo O **" 40. Cross of Accabish of Hexham. 8*1 *>| --it? "> b 5 J IJil a5 "M, o^ O vO vO ^O vO ^ IX, 5^*g5 55 J-i 3 *.; J C ^f rt ^ 13 '3 O S'H ^ 0^ a CJ s*s| i H S Z &t u 2 rt *J ^^ 1 QJ 3 (U >o c -2 a) 06 rt i- ^So2 00 w e \o *x i\ ^> *** "^ ?i <++ ' ' (^ y z* a S |;S |A <; C . ^ *J U k-H LJ &) ^Q *^ '"^ > G . >^: CO *rt "" CO " ^ Q rt j-i ^ ^ a > tS llli* Sll IR Sir t 1 g r^ ** CU o^ 1 5 - i: . i rt T g 'C to w*\O tx r^ t*x t^ t>. ^N a> c/5 a> J3 *x M *^ rt -* UL4 cd - ~ 4> O " r 4 * ,C3 5 w H i i *p, c 1 "? S 25 J5 o ^ G 3 m o 1^*3 E , H , 'S o oT J|f y 3 US rt G 2 . o OT . Si '5 g O O CT\O U ^ t** t*"* tx 273 S rt co < O c n-o M Q 1! * \f\ CN II - nj rt 8 v _tn 13 W O o a to II Oc4 N 2- ~ u _, 13 rt Si bo 1 >SI I O.O 2cj5 g^B, w o c-c^o u g in i 4 5: V o-BS H 5 co ' 4) JO s H? it I rt ^3 S O t >- ^s . a S | Q A -a O >, x ^4 5,^3 .23 rt fi ^4 g ;" CO O. *i 5 !i L J3 U^ 385 |^H S^ J. A. II. 18 274 "0 60 V rt .0 JB "2 s^ a is ^ sf O^^.SrQ^ ** ^ rt '-so *" 5 S D X rX ^2 ,2 > C S-O-- J3 M '-' g <*3 (^ ,^*^ rt u ^ X .ri^rto .S & "^ 1 H * - u > S 4-< *- 1 ^ V-t t~^ '^ ,<*^ . ^ ^ O O '5 2 T w rt 6 ^~* ^"^ * H tf. c/5 >, rt JS ^"2 . ^ij 3,2 vi u S C/3 S= <-> j 3 o <-\ rt *^* . ^ S " en 2 > gc/5 g-g u Cc3 c,^ S s 1 sS < rt!3 3 ' S^jS'SI | .5f>.S o w'o cd rt ,2 J ^ rt M-i S p t y y. . ^ Q^ :*' ( ^ .5? c "> > u S t> S S MJ It5 e ra C 's s ^il 8 cc Soo^-i c>:^ r^^ rt jj C vd ,2 3 O O O O 2 2 T3 *- ^ *^* 4-J ^ Cy *TT "^* *-^ O .'^^ V 0> e i'gs 'I &| ; | 6 s S jj . c"^ z S u *"* N ^ 'rt * ^ O G ** ^"^ O- O Q^ \f\* ~* f^ o' a "-I M I K !M1 1. 6 S^^wS i-iC^o 'J'O ^.t; o.2 S^scSgS >- ll'1^6il^?-^* rS >S* w 5 ^ >o*'t/5 o'> c3 rt w r^c/5 o o o 1 - < M c tv, O ui C 275 3 - S . f -s W 8 " O . ?Q CjZfQeu 1 - 3 * .H* * *(-< OH O. ^ 4} 4; CJ g . S Lo 5 ** Q- :>. "* ' .c ' ' - n _ C I "i _x *, * rt OO t- H^ f3 CO C3 ^T pt OO C/} OO *^ OH cj O^PQ O^*Q 4} O^i* r^J fr\ f*v Q\0H ** O O OO O O O - d f,?l 1 1 . "3 <0 <* 2 N 2 ofe T3O O ,! ^" o *3 ^ C C u I Is* sg| 4j iiiinl o"^ .c -9rt5 8e*J j tS ^ Tl . S oicw SUJ jOv^ cpc'dS g ^ Q 'See lllgl| 8l a| flS.&w-a g> .co w-g TO Cg J- <^-< -, ** n-t "V. S O.y^ o 1 oo CO oo booo S M Q +* H^^CN.S^C cO(j"-C/3w) c<*> *5 o o o ^ Ho M ^^ .cSi "g s*> c3 -"s 8 y "* PQ ^ "2 < " o *Q E> -g C ^ o * oT TT - "H F rt W ^ o - ij . "S^ - G M . S t5 w CO ZZ *_rt W ^j i* ^D o^ofl*- n ^ w n %JO C 2 - W . i i 3 . .S 6 S? dj tj C n 'O Is g-s 1 5j Si Is s * c 3 ^ o ^ - w C g-i i - B wn oo c X g rt "^ ^ rj to J " In >J f*H -< 3 T" <- ' ** f| ^ 1 -! HH ( 1 * 2 S "I a|f|i w rt *^ S 55 1 8 2 276 ENGLISH 1140. Fountains Abbey. Pointed nave arcade. 1150-1180. Oxford. S. Frideswide by Prior Guimond. 1 J 5 5~93- Peterborough. Transepts and nave. 1174-91. Wells. Eastern part of Nave. ^ '= In ||4|| -5 s o > ^ H -s!eS 3 !-!* 6? l"So|* 2 C-S ^ rt^ 6- - S S . r|s5-s 1 sitesi-S *jJ*ldPii ll *l- .2 ft i5 e w ** 5 ^ c fco c s^Q^J*s*8^1Wia Il*j440ifei . t^W r^Jii f>, u r^ u xS t^. 4) U Xi co rt *^ U O G """* O ui rG *^ >G If rt C P -3 T3 il I ii . O rt ^ ^3 i 1 11 tn JC5 =* O. 'la. la X W CJ ^^ ^^ LJ O ** c/5 c/5 c/5 " fe 2 w || .'S T3 o5 TD.iS o5 . e * v j5 w K! .2 -SB"* fe *^* N^ 4) dj >H I 1 C/) *"7 * s " J i i M *-* ^4) V v^ *~^ W ^ O PQ PH ^* C^J yj Hrtp. rti- 1 B rt s| s |-g o-d r^ ,>-< y P^H ^ 4> u, rS S PH HO) rrt C _rt rt ^* *- <" r > O "TS 2 g C N-> (j .!2 ^^ j, j flj S || u5 "^ C 4) ,-T 6 XI O |*> o ! 1 l-s 31 ^ | ^ S f 9 C ^ ^> W rt ^ cr 1 c H * 2 . S ' c 5 *^ c C a; 4) ^4) ^* O fcdQ nj ^^ S CX N rt rt S'^ i" ^ .'S-O 3 bo ""* C$ ^ * C O O *r^ G fe V3 cr 4> O^ rt '^ M rt C '5} CQ C/5 W " G M T, rH 3 H HH O H 4) 3 *" 3 (^ rt ^^ w S'G w w 2 4) M "-* ~ r^ '^ 3 rt rt CJ P * V- t-^ PH " 3^4, ^; o 4> 4) ti . c bo . <" . ii "- co 3 ro 4) IJ~1 P | fT) C-| 1, j G ro -<4- rt 1-1 vr> bo . X> t** rt oo w o 4> H U 4) ** 2 *H< p o Z C 4) s: ' C PC 15 o in 4) o" 13 2/7 in >> If 11=2 f J rj c W *** o . rt 4, o rt C +j f* (u ?? _fv \2 o bo4* c ii o 3 4> 45 _C S S W CJ 3 4) . "3 TJ W "^ CL, si -= ^li "' o'?.S bsb -"2 2g la rtW u e c o* M 2^ S* K6| ^"2 ""o 4) C 13 C rt 4)-g s *--s * 0. rt u u OJ In II * gfe, s- 6 C * u 4) Q, rt u 13 'ti o (/) ^ ^3 4) C Jj w iillf Jw N ^ c N ** ""' N i- 1-1 o 1^ xW r u 304) JD a u a J 2 rt " to . fill M boOn s^ > w ^ . *" s<^ 3 M N 11:1 s ^ s !^ |~] , . * J d >, &J rf JH U2 3-1 M ' . *- dJ |i ^ J3 ^53 ir>ii N M ^Q > E. > ^ C X! 5 S.j s , C rj- O O CVfi OJ3 M M rt 4> bo C>C Z C 5o^g2 7 3 -- 3 oio-rt g - co ja e fO TJ 52 a *j >> ai G '5 5 2 rt UH |-| 'o S S rt ^ i rt x 4) "^ w 5},^ g Q tu g Pi <3 J5 in .y PS ? 4J 4> O in Ji " ^5 en **} N CL.^ T3 ^ rt C g E SO 3 t S *Ci ^ C'g o 1 z S C v> (_j f) N * Q^ o D_, ^c vo rt QJ flj T ^d 2 i* f^-i .Q *? rt 'is rf c cS CO G ; x O 3O w > i i^> i 2 8 CT3 S 2 hi -S rt' 5 8 "Q U 4> e '< .9 *S G i S a .O o'S 3^ K'Si 'o rt {/),; 3 ,Q s PH 4> fl ^H pfl N M . J bo 4) rt d . ^ ."ti *^ 2 i3 9 L ~* 3 *~ * o 4) rt> ~* 4) c C O G "Q !r K O rt IH-I N O<43 rt H (?" J0i cr t^.'O O N J G 1 * 4 .^0 E rt 1-1 <* >-< 2 o w S3 34. Lucca Duomo. West front by Guidetto. o N O J CO d c <& * :he twochurches thrown :ogether. 33. Lucca Duomo. In- terior of portico with doorways. 40. Traii. Dalmatia. Romanesque west por- tal rt C/) s rt "o o !5 rt ISl s8 no's pulpit in baptistery. 90. Orvieto cathedral begun. Consecrated 1309. 92. Florence. S. Croce begun by Arnolfo. 20. Lucca Duomo. The apse. Romanesque. 23. Pisa. Capelladella Spina. Italian Gothic. 2 ~ M ^ N N M N 2ro co M MM Q H . pq i fi"S 6 5" (A .2 < M W I 04 o>o W * jfl o S u -G-a'rt CO Jt H 1 H C >x^ ^ o O z ^ . c *^ >* C ci y rt _u si w a rS ^ II 2 "all OT *3 4> C _O o 1o l-i ^J U S o O'J " O *^ . C o ^ 13 "73 g t Q *4 ft _c t/i *u S> ^T -^ ri-ta o o M vg^ &* u JiS S INDEX Abingdon, Saxon Abbey at, n. 202 Acca, Cross of Bishop, n. 197, 198 Agen, n. 85 Agnellus of Ravenna, i. 149 Aix-la-Chapelle, I. 256; II. I, 33 Albigenses, Persecution of the, n. 82,87 Amiens, II. 81 Ancona, I. 257 Andernach, n. 20, 25 Angers, II. 42, 50 Angouleme, I. 241 ; n. 39, 41, 46, 47, 48, 50, 57, 84 Apse, in Saxon churches, II. 199 ; in Norman Churches, II. 212, 252 ; the German double, n. 9, 10; defects of, II. 1 1 ; double apse in England, II. 202 Aquitaine, Architecture in, II. 34, 169, 259 Arian art at Ravenna, I. 165 Arbe, I. 268 Arch, its use in earliest time, I. 6; the predominant element in Roman architecture, I. 9 Aries, I. 32 ; II. 18, 29, 66-68, 72, 80, 103, 162, 261 ; kingdom of, II. 62-72 Arnolfo del Cambio, I. 134, 249 Atrium, at S. Sophia, 1. 93 ; at S. Irene, I. 109; at Ravenna, I. 155, 177; at Parenzo, I. 183 ; at Milan, I. 262 ; in Germany, II. 18 ; in France, II. 31 Autharis, King of Lombardy, I. 214 Autun, II. 84, 99, 108; S.Jean, n. 112 Auvergne, n. 28, i27; peculiarities of architecture, n. 129, 130, 145, 169, 259 Avallon, n. 105 Avignon, II. 63 Baldacchino, I. 209 Ball-flower ornament, I. 222 Balusters, the Saxon, n. 186, 194, 230 Bangor, II. 184 Barbarian settlements in Italy, I. 145, 161, 228 ; in France, II. 28, 90, 147 Barfreston, n. 246 Barnack, II. 190, 193 Barrel vaulting, II. 3, 51, 52, 56, 108, I2 9> X 33 > prevents a clerestory, n. loo, 130 Barton-on-H umber, II. 190, 191 Basilica, the Roman, I. 16; the model for early Christian churches, 1.23 Basilican plan, its simplicity and its unprogressiveness, I. 18, 24, 205, 206; prevalence in Italy, I. 205 ; II. 258 ; in France, II. 33, 63 ; in Germany, n. 8 ; in England, n. 199 Bath, Roman Thermae at, n. 178 ; abbey, II. 208, 254 Bathos of Art in Italy in 8th century, I. 226 Beauvais, the Basse CEuvre, n. 161 Bede, the Venerable, II. 183, 227 Bedford, capital at, II. 245 Bema, I. 46 Benedictine rule, II. 92, 93 Bergamo, I. 251, 271, 272 Bernard, S., II. 96, 98, 164 ; his attack on luxury and architectural orna- ment, II. 96, 107, 1 08, 250 Bethlehem, Constantine's church at, I. 24 Bewcastle, cross at, II. 196 Biscop Benedict, his buildings, 1 1. 181, 183, 197, 202 Bishops, French, their struggles with regulars, 1 1. 171 Bitton, II. 187 Boppart, II. 25, 26 Borgo, S. Donnino, I. 269, 273 Boscherville, S. Georges de, n. 152, 217, 250 Brantome, II. 141, 142 INDEX 279 Brioude, II. 127, 135 Britain, Roman, II. 173 Burgundians, the, II. 90 Burgundy, architecture in, II. 94, 123, 259; its influence in France and England, I. 273 Bradford-on-Avon, II. 194, 199, 264 Brixworth, II. 177, 190, 199, 200 Busketus or Boschetto, I. 242, 245 Buttress, development of, n. 162 Byzantine Art, its influence at Rome, I. 204 ; at Venice, I. 234, 239 ; in France, I. 241 ; II. 33, 34, 37, 46, 49, 5'. 63, 70, 74, 78, 80, 87, 139, 143, 150 ; in England, II. 183, 196, 197 ; its hieratic character, n. 72, 199 ; its originality, II. 260 Cambridge, S. Bene't's, II. 184, 194, 200 Caen, n. 22, 153, 217, 235, 237 Caerleon-on-Usk, Roman remains, n. 179 Cahors, n. 39, 42, 47, 5, 84 Canterbury, Roman, n. 176 ; Saxon cathedral, n. 202, 210; Norman cathedral, n. 212 &c., 217, 235, 244, 255 ; capital at, II. 247, 248 ; S. Pancras, II. 176, 177, 199, 200 Capitals, Byzantine, I. 52, 57, 62, 233 ; exported from Constantinople, I. 58 Castle Rising, n. 242 Castor, n. 236, 243 Cattaro, I. 41, 209, 215 Cefalu, I. 41, 274 Cerisy le Fort, II. 152, 217 Chaqqa, palace at, I. 29 Chamalieres, 1 1. 133, 137 Charlemagne, conquest of Lombards, I. 227; II. i, 5, 65, 258 Chartres, I. 41 ; n. 81, 142, 250 Chauvigny, II. 45, 52 Chevet, the French, II. 84 Chora, church of the, I. 121 ; II. 49 Christ, representation of, I. 115, 116, 152, 179; II. 29, 250 Christchurch Priory, II. 217, 234, 253, 254 Christianity established, I. 15, 186 ; rapid progress in the East, I. 27 ; slow progress at Rome, I. 146 Cicero, his attitude towards the arts, 1.4 Cimabue, I. 134 Cistercians, II. 92 ; severity of their architecture, II. 96, 98, 107, 125 Citeaux, Abbey of, II. 92, 96, 98 Cividale, I. 131, 185, 215, 217; n. 242 Civray, II. 47, 52, 57, 239 Clairvaux, Abbey of, n. 96, 98 Clapham, n. 190 Clavigo, Ruy de, his visit, I. 93, ill Clermont Ferrand, n. 28,30, 56, 127, 131, 132, 142 Cloisters, II. 18, 72, 78, 88, 104, 139 Cluny, Abbey of, II. 92, 94, 98, 123 Coblentz, II. 20 Cockerell, C. R., his remarks on S. Sophia, I. 100 Cologne, I. 251; n. 9, 18; S. Maria in Capitolio, 11. 18; other churches, II. 1 8, 25, 27; cathedral, II. 25 Comacina Irisula, I. 211 Comacini Magistri, I. 211, 212, 213 Communes, rise of Lombard, I. 260 ; German, II. 8; French, II. 170 Como, I. 2ii, 239, 250, 269, 272; II. 258 Constance, peace of, I. 260 Constantinople, third Council of, con- demns images, I. 118 Constantinople, founded, I. 15; a Greek city, I. 26 The Apostles church, I. 15, 109, 232 Church of the Chora, 1. 121, 130; n. 49 S. Irene, I. 15, 76, 106, 115 S. John Bapt. Studion, I. 67 S. Maria Diaconissa, I. 124 S. Maria Pammakaristos, I. 139 S. MariaPanachrantos,l.i22, 126 S. Saviour Pan tepoptes, 1. 128, 130 S. Saviour Pantocrator, I. 122, 125, 128; II. 34, 84 S. Sophia, 1. 1 5, 40, 64, 73, 82, and seq., 174, 239; II. 66, 133; construction of buttresses, 1.91 ; construction of dome, I. 97; II. 36, 50 ; criticisms on, I. 100 ; report on present state, I. 102 S. Thecla, I. 128 SS. Sergius and Bacchus, I. 68, 78, in, 173, 174,239; 11.79 S. Theodore the Tiro, I. 122, 126, 128, 133 ; II. 34 S. Theodosia (Gul Djami), 1. 122, 127, 128 280 INDEX Constantinople (continued) Domestic work, I. 140 Mosques, I. 143 ; II. 108 Tekfur Serai, I. 140 ; II. 131 Walls, I. 54 ; Porta Aurea, I. 55, 138 Contado, Contadini, I. 260 Corbridge, II. 190 Corhampton, I. 218 ; II. 192, 193, 200 Crypt, I. 219, 246; II. 14, 15, 20, 209, 212, 2l8 Ctesiphon, palace at, I. 36 Curzola, I. 209, 271 Cushion capital, I. 269, 273 ; II. 149, 153, 213, 217; improvement of, n. 243 Cuthbert, S., II. 183, 223 Dado, of marble and mosaic, I. 179, 182 Dalmatia, I. 241, 250, 271 Dedication of temples as churches, 1.44 Deerhurstj H. 187, 188, 190, 200 Dijon, S. Bem'gne, I. 192; n. 119, 152 Diotisalvi, architect, I. 258, 259, 273 Dog-tooth ornament, I. 222 Dome, Eastern origin of, I. 34 ; various modes of construction in Greece, Rome and the East, I. 35 ; construction without centering, I. 37 ; domes on pendentives, I. 39 ; at S. Sophia, I. 96 ; at Ravenna, I. 150, 174 ; at Venice, I. 240; Pisa, I. 244 ; in Southern Italy, I. 274 ; in Germany, II. 3, 13, 19 ; in France, " 34, 35. 36, 39, 42, 5, 63, 114; the tower dome, I. 128 ; dome on drum, I. 73, 108 ; n. 42 Domical plan prevails over Basilican in the East, I. 56, 67 ; yields to basilican plan in Italy, I. 205, 240 Dosseret see Pulvino Dover Castle, church in, II. 177, 189, 199 Durham, II. 81, 208, 223 Earl's Barton, I. 218 ; II. 190, 192 Eastern empire, essentially Greek, I. 26 ; spread of Christianity in, I. 27 ; strong Asiatic influence on its art, I. 28 Eginhardt, II. I, 5, 10 Elne, II. 78 Elstow, II. 230 Ely, II. 154, 220, 244; Prior's door at, II. 251 Entablature, returned as impost, I. 23 ; dispensed with, I. 22 Escomb, li. 199 Eton College Chapel, li. 263 Etruria, its influence on Roman art, I- 5 Etruscan Deities, survival of their worship, I. 147; tombs, I. 217, 225 Exarchate established, I. 172 Exeter, n. n Ezra, church at, I. 33, 34, 37, 81 ; II. 79 Fecamp, u. 122, 151 Fergusson, his view of Roman archi- tecture, I. i ; on early French vaults, II. 65 Fiesole, I. 247 Figure sculpture, absent in Syria, I. 41 ; and in Byzantine churches, i. 114; barbarous in Italian Ro- manesque, 215 ; in early Norman, II. 242 Florence, S. Miniato, I. 243, 246 ; II. 258 ; Baptistery, I. 247 Flying buttress, II. 25, 27, 100 Fontevrault, li. 39, 41, 50, 85 Fortified Churches, li. 87, 138 Fountains Abbey, n. 236 France, Gallo- Roman culture, II. 28 ; its decay, II. 32 ; Roman remains in, II. 28 ; effect of barbarian settle- ments, li. 29, 30 ; dearth of early Christian buildings, II. 32; its separ- ation into provinces, II. 32 ; Byzan- tine influence in, n. 34, 37, 51, 63, 70, 78, 80, 139 ; decay of, II. 49 Free cities of Germany, n. 8; of Lombardy see Communes Freemasons, I. 213 Frejus, n. 79 Galilee at Durham, n. 227 Galla Placidia, her tomb house, I. 39, 116, 152 Galleries, exterior arcaded, I. 244, 250, 251, 254, 256, 257, 266, 269, 272 ; II. 9, 13, 24, 258 Genoa, I. 242 German fashions, their popularity, i. 162 German immigration, I. 161, 163 ; II. 28, 32 INDEX 281 German Romanesque, its beginning, II. i; the double apse, II. 9, 11; the gabled spire, II. 20 ; its character, II. 81, 258 Germany, free cities of the Empire, II. 9 Germigny des Pres, II. 33 Gernrode, II. 9 Giggleswick, dome at, I. 37 Gildas, II. 174 Giraldus Cambrensis, II. 179-180 Glass, coloured, I. 180; its abuse, II. 27 ; in Gaul, II. 31 Glass-making, revived in Britain, II. 182 Glastonbury, II. 177, 185, 235 Gloucester, I. 222 ; II. 27, 208, 216, 231 Gothic, its origin in L'lle de France, II. 1 60 ; not adopted in Provence and Auvergne, n. 80, 145 Grado, I. 66, 183, 235 ; S. Maria in, I. 184 Greek artists at Rome, I. 5 ; in Italy, I. 154, 163, 1 68, 169, 204 Greek church and ritual, I. 44 ; plan of Greek church, I. 46 Greensted church, II. 181 Grotesque, the, II. 49, 57 Guidetto, architect at Lucca, I. 253, 259 Guizot, on Gallo-Roman France, II. 32, 33 Gynaeconitis Matroneum, or women s gallery, I. 47, 56, 84, 95, 177, 197, 204, 205 Hagiology, the Christian, I. 167 Hawksworth, II. 250 Headbourne- Worthy, II. 187 Hereford, II. 233 Hexham, Saxon minster at, II. 201, 209 Hildesheim, II. 21 Iconoclasm, I. 66, 114-120, 227, 228 ; not hostile to art, I. 119 Iconostasis, I. 46 Iffley, II. 242 Insula Comacina, I. 211 Ireland, early churches in, n. 177. 183 Issoire, n. 127, 134, 137, 142, 144 Italian Art in I4th century compared with Byzantine, I. 133 Jak, I. 268 J arrow, Monastery at, II. 183 Julian, Emperor, I. 26, 146 Jumieges, II. 153 Justinian, at S. Sophia, I. 85 ; II. 39, 167 ; his reputed skill in construc- tion, I. 85, 86 ; at Ravenna, I. 173, 179; his character, I. m, 112 Kahriyeh Djami, I. 121, 130 Kencott, door-head, n. 249 Ketton, n. 256 King's College Chapel, II. 263 Laach, II. 12, 16, 25 Lanfranc of Pavia, n. 153, 210 Langres, n. 84 Laymen as Architects, I. 253; n. 172 Leighton, Lord, on German apses, n. ii Le Mans, n. 85, 161 Length of English churches, II. 253 Le Puy, II. 39, 43, 51, 138, 142; S. Michel de 1' Aiguille, II. 131, 143 L'lle de France, II. 159; cradle of Gothic, II. 160 ; scarcity of Roman- esque, II. 160 Limoges, I. 241 ; II. 60, 145 ; Venetian colony at, II. 37 Lincoln cathedral, 1 1. 208 Lindisfarne, II. 183, 223 Lions at portals, I. 223, 271 ; II. 252 Loches, II. 46 Lombard architecture, I. 260, 267, 273 ; towers, I. 267 ; II. 258 Lombard invasion, I. 210; fall of kingdom, I. 227 Lombardy, cradle of communal liberty, I. 260 London, S. Paul's, II. 208 Long and short work, n. 190 Lorsch, II. S Lucca cathedral, I. 245, 250, 251, 257 ; S.Michele, 1.250, 254,257; S.Pietro Somaldi, I. 254; other churches, I. 254; towers, I. 257, 267 ; facades, I. 273; II. n Ludlow, capital at, 1 1. 245 Lyons, II. 28, 31, 32, 116, 142 Mainz, I. 251 ; II. 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 17 Malmesbury, n. 251 Malvern, II. 233, 254 Mantes, II. 263, 264 Marble, use of coloured, I. 10, 48 ; 282 INDEX facing and mosaic, I. 63, 64, 125, 141, 176, i?9 l8o > 190-191, 238, 244 ; imported by Charlemagne, II. 2 Mashita, I. 49, 237 Matroneum see Gynaeconitis Milan, Edict of, i. 186 Milan, seat of Empire, I. 14 ; de- stroyed, I. 261 ; head of Lombard league, I. 261 ; S. Ambrogio, I. 261, 267, 273; II. 155, 258 ; S. Ba- bila, I. 268, 269 ; S. Eustorgio, I. 269 ; S. Satiro, I. 268 ; S. Sepolcro, 1.268 Mithra, cult of, I. 45, 147, 201 Modena, I. 269, 271, 273 Moissac, II. 87, 88 Monasticism, its origin, n. 91 ; in Burgundy, II. 91 ; refuge of the Arts, II. 93, 124 Monkwearmouth, II. 184, 199, 200 Montmajeur, n. 75-78 Mont S. Michel, II. 151 Monza, Theodelinda's church at, I. 214 Mosaic of marble see Marble Mosaic of glass, i. 49, 57, 58, 64, 71, 75. 98, US, "9, 132, 149, 151, 152, 164, 179, 182, 203, 249; relation of those at the "Chora" to Italian art, I. 133 ; inconsistency with coloured glass, II. 27 ; example in France, II. 34 Mosques of Constantinople, I. 143 Mural-painting, inconsistent with coloured glass, II. 27 Murano, I. 235 i. Narthex, I. 46, 56, 68, 95, 124, 132, 177, 191; II. 176 Neuvy, S. Sepulchre, II. 122, 123 Nevers, Count of, his disputes with Vdzelay, n. 170 Nicaea, first council of, I. 26; second council of, restores image worship, I. 118 Nicomedia, church at, I. 17 Nimbus, its use or absence, I. 71, 75, 77, 167, 179 Nimes, I. 7, 8; II. 28, 29 Norman architecture, its character, II. 149, 158, 169, 208,259 Normans in Italy, I. 274; II. 149; in France, II. 147, 160; in England, I. 273 ; II. 149, 205 Northampton, S. Peter's, n. 237, 246 Norwich, II. 81, 154, 208, 221 Nymeguen, II. 8 Odoacer, end of the Western Empire, I. 146, 161, 172 Odon de Deuil, his account of Con- stantinople, I. no, 142 Orders, the classic, abandoned in the East, I. 40, 43 ; Gothic, subordina- tion of, i. 264, 265 Ornament, extravagant use of, by Romans, I. 10 Oxford, S. Michael's, II. 193, 194, 209 ; S. Peter in the East, II. 209 Padua, S. Antonio, I. 240 Paganism, its duration at Rome, I. 146; its disappearance, I. 147 Painters, Greek in Italy, I. 134, 205 Palermo, I. 242, 245, 274 Papacy, its growth, I. 226 ; its breach with the East, I. 227 ; acquires the Exarchate, I. 227 Parenzo, I. 66, 181, 195; II. 224 Paris, Notre Dame, 1 1. 80 Parma, I. 250, 266, 268, 271, 272, 273 Patrons of Art, their place in design, II. 1 66, 167 Pavements, i. 156, 180, 184, 198, 208, 220; ii. 173, 176 Pavia, i. 210, 215, 266, 272, 273 Pendentives, I. 39, 73, 83, 91, 103, 240, see Dome Pe*rigueux, S. Front, I. 241 ; n. 34, 50, 52 ; its influence, II. 56 ; S. Etienne, II. 42, 50 Pershore, II. 85 Perugia, S. Angelo, I. 193 Peteroorough.,'11. 154, 230, 254, 255 Philip II (Augustus) of France, n. 159-160 Pilgrimages, their value, II. 165, 216 Pisa, i. 242 ; Duomo, I. 242, 273 ; n. 258 ; its influence on art, I. 245, 250 ; campanile, 1. 258 ; baptistery, I. 258, 259, 272 ; II. 263 ; Capella della Spina, I. 251 Pisano, Niccola, I. 134, 259; II. 263 Pistoja, I. 245, 272, 273 Pittington church, n. 228 Plutarch, on social status of artists, T -3 Poitiers, S. Hilaire, II. 42, 44, 52; Notre Dame, II. 45, 46, 52, 56, 239 ; INDEX 283 Montierneuf, n. 52; S. Radegonde, II. 57 ; Temple de S. Jean, II. 52 ; cathedral, II. 50 Pola, I. 218 Polignac, II. 45 Polychrome masonry, I. 238-239 ; II. 102, 130, 139, 237 Pomposa, I. 184 Pontigny, II. 107 Porches, the Lombard, I. 273 Procopius, his account of S. Sophia, I. 82; of other churches by Jus- tinian, I. 109, 1 10 ; II. 167 ; the Historia Arcana, I. 112 Provence, its history, II. 62 ; Roman remains, n. 28 ; architecture in, II. 63, 169, 258 Pulpit, at Toscanella, I. 224 ; at Pisa, I. 259 ; at Milan, I. 264 Pulvino, its invention, I. 51, 171; at Salonica, I. 57, 62 ; at Constanti- nople, I. 99, 1 08 ; at Ravenna, I. 149-150, 154, 164, 171, 176; at Rome, I. 191 ; at Venice, I. 233 ; at Parenzo, I. 182 Qualb-Louzet, I. 41 Quennaouat, I. 32 Ravenna, I. 145, 148 ; II. 32. S. Apollinare Nuovo, I. 50, 66, 157, 163, 172, 206 S. Apollinare in Classe, I. 53, 131, 1 80, 206 S. Agata, I. 156, 166 Baptistery, I. 149 ; n. 54 Basilica Ursiana, I. 148, 171, 216 Ivory throne, I. 158 Galla Placidia's tomb house, I. 39, 116, 152 S. Giovanni Evangelista, I. 153, 165, 171 S. Maria in Cosmedin, I. 167, 172 Ecclesia Petriana, legend of, I. 1 59 S. Piero Chrysologo, I. 157 Rotunda, I. 168 S. Spirito, I. 157 S. Vitale, I. 53, 167, 173. 239, 240 ; II. 3, 257 Ravenna a school of art, I. 169, 170 Reason in architecture, n. 266 Reculver, II. 199, 200 Report on structural condition of S. Sophia, Constantinople, I. 102 Repton, n. 1 88, 199-209 Riez, II. 78 Ripon, Saxon minster, II. 201, 209 Ritual, growth of Christian, I. 45 ; in the Greek church, I. 46 Rivoira, on Ravennate art, i. 170 Rochester, II. 152, 235, 250 Rodpertus, architect, I. 213, 217, 219 Roman attitude towards the arts, I. 3, 4; influence on formation of style, i. 5, 6 Roman architecture, the only ancient style of use to us, I. 1 1 ; universal use throughout the empire, I. 13 ; strength of its tradition, II. 180, 259 Rome, contest for the bishopric, I. 187 Rome, Baptistery, the Lateran, I. 189 Byzantine influence at, I. 204 S. Agnese fuori le Miira, 1. 186, 193, 203 S. Clemente, I. 186, 198, 209; II. 10 S. Costanza, I. 52, 80, 1 19, 158, 189, 192, 205, 249 ; II. 123, 227 S. Francesca Romana, I. 207 S. Giorgio in Velabro, I. 202, 207, 209 S. Giovanni in Laterano, I. 188 SS. Giovanni e Paolo, I. 201, 207, 251, 271 S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, I. 186, 193, 204, 209 S. Maria Antica, I. 204; II. 183 S. Maria in Cosmedin, I. 197, 207, 272 ; II. 10, 224 S. Maria in Domnica, I. 201 S. Maria Maggiore, I. 24, 167, 186, 195 S. Maria in Trastevere, I. 186 S. Paolo fuori le Mura, I. 18, 24. i 86, 187 S. Peter's, I. 18 and seg., 24, 96, 186 S. Prassede, I. 202 S. Sabina, I. 195, 218 S. Stefano Rotondo, I. 191, 205 Campaniles at Rome, I. 207 Romsey, II. 234 Round arch, monastic adherence to, n. 236, 255 Round churches, n. 122 Royal power, extension of, in France, II. 159, 170 Royat, II. 138 Ruchwell, cross at, II. 196 Saintes, II. 57 284 INDEX S. Alban's, II. 81, 208, 229 S. Andrew's, II. 190 S. Aventin, II. 86 S. Bertrand de Comminges, II. 85 S. David's, II. 245 S. Denis, 1 1. 65, 163 S. Evremond, n. 162 S. Gall, II. 10, 1 8 S. Gilles, I. 272; II. ir, 68, 80, 103, 249, 261 S. Junien, II. 42, 48, 52, 57, 59, 142 S. Just, II. 85 S. Leonard, II. 42, 53, 60, 142 S. Lorenzo in Pasenatico, II. 192, 194 S. Nectaire, II. 127, 135 S. Saturnin, II. 138 S. Savin, n. 52, 59, 114 Sagittarius, n. 248 Salonica, Eski Djouma, I. 46, 56, 65, 69, 71, 171, 206 Church of the Apostles, I. 128, 137, 233 Church of S. Demetrius, I. 48, 53, 60, 74, 181, 206, 233 ; II. 139 Church of S. Elias, I. 127, 136 Church of S. George, I. 46, 69 Church of S. Sophia, I. 53, 73, 115, 171, 181 ; II. 141 Sarcophagus, patent for, I. 170 ; Christian, I. 109, 216 ; II. 29 Saulieu, II. 99, 1 16 Saxon architecture, its characteristics, II. 1 80 etc., 202, 203, 259 ; the greater churches, 1 1. 201 ; its in- fluence on Norman, II. 209 Sculpture, Byzantine, I. 51, 57, 62, 93* 99, IS4, 176, 234, 241 ; Byzan- tine avoidance of human figure, I. 41, 51, 234; II. 70; in Lombardy, I. 215, 264, 273 ; in Aquitaine, II. 46; in Germany, II. 16, 25, 26 ; in Pro- vence, II. 70, 80, 88 ; at Moissac, II. 88 ; in Burgundy, II. 103, 106, lio, 112 ; in Auvergne, II. 133, 144; in Normandy, II. 149, 154; in Saxon England, n. 196 ; in Nor- man England, II. 239 etc., 251 Sebenico, I. 32, 271 Sens, n. 84 Sidonius Apollinaris, II. 28, 30, 32, 52,90,91, 116, 117 Silchester, n. 173, 175, 199 Sinan, architect, I. 144 Solignac, II. 40, 41, 42, 50 Sompting, II. 21 Souaideh, i. 32 Souillac, II. 39, 49, 50, 84 Southwell, II. 154 Spalato, Diocletian's palace, I. 21, 31, 41, 163 ; tower, I. 268 ; II. 56 Speyer, I. 251; 11.9, 12, 14 Spire, in Dalmatia, I. 268 ; in Ger- many, II. 20 Square end to church, in France, n. 50; in England, n. 184, 199, 209, 252 Squinch, I. 38 Stamford, S. Leonard's, II. 256 Stow Longa, doorhead, n. 242 Strassburg, II. 21 Strip-work masonry, II. 191 Stucco, ornament in, I. 183, 185 ; II. 34 Suger, abbot, n. 65, 164 Sul, British deity at Bath, n. 178 Symbolism in sculpture, II. 248-249 Syria, its influence on Byzantine art, I. 28, 42 Taurobolium, rite of, I. 147 Tewkesbury, n. 85, 231 Theodelinda, Queen, I. 214, 215, 247 Theodora, I. 173, 179 Theodoric, king of Italy, I. 161, 173, 226, 228; his care for old buildings, I. 162 ; tomb, I. 1 68 ; palace at Ravenna, I. 163, 165, 166 ; II. 2 Theodoric II, II. 29 Theodosius the Great, edicts against Paganism, I. 147 Theodosius 1 1, his walls at Constanti- nople, I. 54 Thoronet, II. 78 Timber, scarcity of, in Syria, I. 29 ; use in Saxon architecture, II. 180 Torcello, I. 206, 218, 235 Toscanella, S. Pietro, I. 216; n. u, 193; S. Maria Maggiore, I. 221, 271; Canonica, I. 22 ij other buildings, I. 225 Toulouse, II. 28, 82 Tourmanin, I. 41 Tournai, II. 21 Tours, II. 30, 56 x - Towers, at Ravenna, 1.^5, 178; at Rome, I. 207 ; at Lucca, I. 257 ; in Lombardy, I. 267, 268; II. 190 ; in Dalmatia, I. 268 ; in Germany, II. 9, 12, 17; in Saxon England, II. 190 INDEX 285 Trabeation, its use by the Romans I. 22 ; weakness of, I. 9 Traii, I. 41, 209, 268, 271 ; II. 69 Triforium, I. 269; II. 154, 202 ; pro- portion of, II. 217, 222, 228, 231, 234 Triple chancel arch, n. 200 Tromp, I. 38 Troyes, church of S. Urbain, u. 126 Ursus, bishop of Ravenna, I. 148 Valence, II. 112, 162, 163 Variety of English churches, II. 255 Vasari on Gothic architecture, II. 261 Vaults, mode of building without centering, I. 36; German, n. 25; French barrel, n. 65, 99, 108 ; Byzantine, II. 66 ; cross vaulting, II. loo, 1 08; its influence on archi- tecture, li. 267 Venetian dentil, I. 238 Venice, attachment to Eastern Em- pire, I. 229 ; early government, I. 230; S. Mark's, I. 50, 53, 230, 240; n. 50; imitated at Pe"rigueux, n. 36, 51 ; peculiarity of Venetian architecture, I. 229, 238, 239 ; Fon- daco dei Turchi, I. 235, 238, 239 ; her commerce, I. 240 ; colony at Limoges, I. 241 ; II. 37 Vercelli, I. 267 Verona, I. 271, 273 Vdzelay,' II. 98, 131, 169, 170 Vienna, II. 1 1 Vienne, II. 28, 114 Vignory, JI. 84 Viollet-le-Duc, his remarks on Early French architecture, n. 32, 265 Viterbo, I. 225 Volpiano, see William of Waltham, II. 81 Warburton, Eliot, his remarks on S. Sophia, I. ico Wells, n. 11, 255, 256 Westminster Abbey, l. 208; II. 85, 205 Wilfrid, his buildings, II. 181, 183, 197, 20 1, 202 William of Volpiano, I. 273; n. 119, 121, 151-153 Winchester, I. 243; II. 27, 81, 154, 208, 213; capital from, II. 246, 247 Window slabs, pierced, 1 1. 192 Wittering, II. 190, 199, 200 Women,' their place in Greek church, I. 47, see Gynaeconitis Word well, door-head, 1 1. 242 Worms, I. 251 ; II. 9, 10, 12, 15 ; the Jews' Synagogue, II. 14 Worth, II. 177, 199, 200 Wykeham, William of, II. 167 Wynford, William, n. 167 York, early churches at, I. 86 ; II. 180, 181 Zara, I. 241, 250, 257, 268 ; II. 258, 263 Zig-zag ornament, I. 222 ; II. 228, 239, 242, 256 CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY j. B. PEACE, M.A., AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. A 000 451 of CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES