earlier date) of what the French call the capital “_à crochet_.” I
exhibit a sketch showing its origin from a plain unruffled leaf, which
accompanied the Byzantine acanthus (Fig. 51). This plain leaf may be
seen in a simple form in the apsidal columns at Noyon, in a more
advanced state in the nave of the same church, and at Laon (which,
however, is a good deal later), and pretty well developed at Sens, and
at Montmartre. In Nôtre Dame the capital _à crochet_ assumes a
considerable importance, and in the west front is used in its most
perfect purely conventional form; while a little later, as at the Sainte
Chapelle, it is decked and entwined with natural leaves in the most
elegant manner imaginable. No feature which arose during the French
transition is so universal in its influence on the architecture of other
countries. In France its use is often carried to a vicious excess; but,
used in moderation, it is a very valuable element in the
_architecturalisation_ of foliage.
[Illustration: Fig. 56.--Sainte Chapelle.]
[Illustration: Fig. 57.--Sainte Chapelle.]
[Illustration: Fig. 58.--St. Remi, Rheims, W.E.]
I have to apologise, as well for the length to which I have prolonged my
remarks on the French transition, as for the very meagre outline with
which the limits of a lecture have compelled me to satisfy myself. I
will reserve a few remarks suggested by what has passed so hastily in
review till I have described some of the English examples.
The English transition was so complete in itself, and all its stages so
perfect and so consecutive, that were it not for our knowledge of that
of France, and for the _interpolation_--if I may say so--of the almost
purely French work at Canterbury, one would be loath to believe that it
had been influenced by any other than the natural and spontaneous
working out of the development of our own Romanesque.
It may be divided into several stages, though they are often
intermingled in the same work.
[Illustration: Fig. 59.--Fountains Abbey. View across Nave.]
First, those buildings which are strictly Romanesque, excepting only
that pointed arches are partially used. Such is the nave of Fountains
Abbey. The date of this is unknown; but it was in all probability
erected between 1140 and 1150, thus agreeing in age with St. Denis. Next
comes Kirkstall Abbey, commenced in 1153, and, though it appears to have
taken thirty-three years to complete it, retaining the same character
throughout--_purely_ Romanesque--and that of a stern and severe variety,
but with the pointed arches to its more important parts. Buildwas Abbey
belongs to the same class, commenced probably a few years after the
foundation of the abbey in 1135, its earlier parts thus probably
agreeing in age with Fountains.
[Illustration: Fig. 60.--Kirkstall Abbey, South Transept.]
These examples would appear at first sight to date back our transition
as early as that of France; but this would scarcely be a fair
conclusion, for, without doubt, many French examples of the same
kind--mere Romanesque with the larger arches pointed--exist in France of
an earlier date than that of Abbot Suger’s work. I will therefore pass
over these merely incipient specimens.
The next class is the extremely refined Norman,
[Illustration: Fig. 61.--Galilee, Durham.]
with or without pointed arches--such as the Galilee at Durham, where,
though the date is clearly transitional, the ornaments are Norman of a
delicate character, very different from Fountains and Kirkstall, and
showing a later date. This was the work of the celebrated Bishop Pudsey,
the great promoter of the transition in the north. He commenced in 1155
(as I
[Illustration: Fig. 62.--St. Mary’s Abbey, York. Vestibule of Chapter
House. View from Cloister (restored).]
believe) with his chapter-house--a purely Norman work--and closed with
the erection of Darlington Church, nearly as purely Pointed;[24] his
episcopate spreading over about forty years. Of this class the examples
in the north of England are most numerous, but are so intermixed with
decidedly Pointed work as somewhat to confuse the classification. It is
common, in fact, to find a building nearly purely Pointed, but with
doorways of this class; of which there is a notable, but not very early
instance, at Jedburgh, where the doorways are perfect gems of refined
Norman of the highest class and most artistic finish, while the interior
of the church is purely Pointed.
[Illustration: Fig. 64.--St. Mary’s Abbey, York. Plan of Vestibule of
the Chapter House.]
One of the most remarkable specimens of this class is at St. Mary’s
Abbey, at York, in the vestibule of the chapter-house. I give a restored
view of one of the entrances, partly from remains _in situ_, and partly
from fragments preserved in the Museum. The date of this most exquisite
work is unknown; but I should suppose it contemporary with the later
years of Archbishop Roger, the great promoter of the transition in that
diocese, and who presided over the see from 1154 to 1181. He rebuilt the
choir of his cathedral, of which the noble remains of the crypt were
[Illustration: Fig. 63.--St. Mary’s Abbey, York. View of Vestibule from
Chapter-House (restored).]
[Illustration: Fig. 66.--Part of Choir of Ripon Minster, as built by
Archbishop Roger de Pont l’Evêque.]
discovered a few years back, of a very refined Norman style. He also
built the palace on the north side of the cathedral, of which a most
beautiful fragment remains (Fig. 65). This fragment, though simple, and
with round arches, agrees exactly in its detail with the doorway at St.
Mary’s, even to the exact diameter and height of its shafts and
capitals, and was, no doubt, executed by the same persons.
[Illustration: Fig. 65.--Archbishop’s Palace, York.]
Roger, also, as has been proved by Mr. Walbran, built the choir at
Ripon, of which I give a bay (Fig. 66). Of the same class, and in the
same diocese, may be mentioned the west end of Selby Abbey and the
Church at Old Malton; Roche Abbey, and of the same date are probably the
stately remains of Byland Abbey--one of the noblest relics of the age,
and of which the choir was clearly built on the plan of that of Roger at
York.
[Illustration: Fig. 67.--Ely Cathedral, South Transept. West end.]
In the south I will first mention the Church of St. Cross, near
Winchester, which seems to be intermediate between the above-named
classes; it is Norman, of a grand and severe, but, at the same time,
highly refined character, but with pointed arches to all principal
parts; its foliage is untinged by French taste, but is of a very refined
and elegant character; it is as massive as the earlier specimens,
without their heaviness--impressive, without becoming oppressive; it is,
in fact, the most perfect and the purest type of the indigenous English
transition. Unfortunately, its date is unknown, for though founded in
1136, and the hospital actually commenced in that year, it is impossible
to give so early a date to the church. It was founded by Henry de Blois,
brother to King Stephen, who held the see of Winchester from 1129 to
1171, and it is but reasonable to suppose that the earlier parts of the
church were completed during his lifetime.
[Illustration: Fig. 68.--St. Cross, near Winchester.]
Contemporary with the close of this structure is the great western tower
of the Cathedral at Ely, erected by Bishop Ridel, between 1174 and 1189,
in a very grand and effective style, for the most part purely English in
character, but occasionally displaying the influence of French examples
in the use of the _crochet_ capital.
This brings me to the great type of the third class--those buildings
which are unquestionably in the Pointed style, but retain sufficient
reminiscences of their Romanesque origin to distinguish them from the
fully-developed Early English. I allude to the choir (Fig. 69) and
Trinity Chapel (Fig. 70) at Canterbury. I may here save myself and you
much time by referring you to Professor Willis’s admirable architectural
history of this cathedral, a book with which every architectural student
should be familiar. I will only mention that the splendid late Norman
choir having been destroyed by fire in 1174, the monks committed its
restoration to William of Sens, who had, in all probability, been
engaged on the recently-completed cathedral in that city. He carried on
the works till disabled by an accident in 1179, when he left them in the
hands of his assistant, called, by way of distinction, William, the
Englishman, who brought them to a close in 1184 or 1185.
[Illustration: Fig. 71.--Canterbury Cathedral, Capitals. William of
Sens.]
The work of the first William is almost purely French, and, though far
more elaborate than that at Sens, very strongly resembles it. He had,
however, the good judgment to Anglicise it in a slight degree, as we see
in the liberal use of the zigzag and other
[Illustration: Fig. 69.--Canterbury Cathedral. Choir.]
[Illustration: Fig. 70.--Canterbury Cathedral. Trinity Chapel.]
Norman ornaments. His capitals are some of the Byzantine character of
Sens, and others in the newly-developed style of Nôtre Dame at Paris,
and are very finely carved (Fig. 71). The arches are not all pointed,
the pier arches, wall ribs, and triforium arches being round.
[Illustration: Fig. 72--Trinity Chapel, Canterbury Cathedral. Capital.
William the Englishman.]
William the Englishman discarded the Byzantine foliage, and adopted,
almost exclusively, the Nôtre Dame type and the capital _à crochet_,
which he carried out with extreme beauty. His work is far more beautiful
than that of his master, though from the resemblance of the plan to that
of Sens, and from the use of doubled columns, it must have been laid
down by the French William. I know no work of the age finer than those
of these two architects. One thing I will remark about the second
architect, that he made his crypt, in which he worked unfettered by the
designs of another, more English than the superstructure, using there
(as he did also in one or two other places) the round abacus,
subsequently so characteristic of English work.
The influence of the French work thus introduced into England is
distinctly marked, and there is no difficulty in tracing it wherever it
exists; but it is by no means such as to supersede the national type.
Perhaps the most pervading symptom of it is the prevalence henceforth
of the _crochet_ capital, though even that seldom assumes a form wholly
French, but receives a distinctly English and often a local
modification. The most palpable instance (and almost the only one of
this direct kind which I remember) of the imitation of Canterbury work
is seen in the hall of the castle at Oakham, built by Walkelin de
Ferrers, probably, as Mr. Hartshorne says, between 1180 and 1190. In
this the capitals, though with some originality, are obviously of French
character, and probably founded on those of the Trinity Chapel.[25]
[Illustration: Fig. 73.--Oakham Castle.]
Immediately after Canterbury, and probably in part contemporaneous with
it, was the magnificent Abbey Church of Glastonbury. It appears to have
been erected chiefly between 1180 and 1190, though finished a little
later. I am not aware whether the Chapel of St. Joseph of Arimathea
(which stands at the west end, like the Galilee at Durham) was built
earlier than the church:[26] at first sight it would convey that
impression, all the arches, except those of the vaulting, being round.
In its details, however, it
[Illustration: Fig. 74.--Chapel of St. Joseph of Arimathea, Glastonbury.
Exterior View.]
resembles those of the church, where the arches are all pointed. This
chapel is of exquisite beauty, and its details in the highest degree
refined; indeed, nothing could exceed the studious care with which every
feature and the profile of every moulding is carried out. The English
type is adhered to in the retention, in an exceedingly refined form, and
in great variety of decorations founded in the chevron, and in the use
of intersecting arcades. The external buttresses assume
[Illustration: Fig. 75.--Chapel of St. Joseph of Arimathea, Glastonbury.
Interior View.]
a form of peculiar elegance and originality; the base moulds are of
noble form, wholly differing from those in France. The turrets at the
angles are of great beauty. The whole shows symptoms of a perfect
knowledge of French developments, but the only distinctive imitation of
them is in the capitals, which display, in many instances, the _crochet_
form, but with a beauty and freedom of treatment peculiarly their own,
differing not only from the French examples, but from the great majority
of English ones, and exercising a strong local influence, extending from
Somerset along the north side of the Bristol Channel, and reaching even
the distant Cathedral of St. David’s. The church agrees in its details
with the chapel, but its remains are grievously fragmentary. The
triforium was united
[Illustration: Fig. 76.--Cathedral of St. David’s. Internal Bay of
Nave.]
with the pier arcade in a manner I do not recollect in any other Pointed
church, though it is seen on a round-arched form at Oxford, and in the
early portion of Jedburgh Abbey. The piers are beautifully clustered, as
is suggested by the multifarious destinations of their parts, one
portion being to carry the vaulting of the aisles; a second, the lower
tier of pier-arches; a third, the upper tier; and a fourth, the higher
vaulting. It is distressing to think how little of this most glorious
church remains. It was probably unequalled by any transitional church in
England, but has actually--even up to our own day--been used as a stone
quarry!
I should have mentioned that in the chapel the pointed vaulting is used
in its fully-developed form--both main arches and side cells being
pointed.
Of the same age is a great part of the Cathedral of St. David’s, of
which I give an internal bay (Fig. 76). It was commenced in 1182, just
after William of Sens relinquished his work at Canterbury. Its character
is decidedly more Romanesque than that of Glastonbury. The arches are
generally round, and the vaulting seems to have reversed the early
custom, being round in the main arch, and pointed in its side cells. The
ornaments of the chevron type are used, as at Glastonbury; there is the
same refined and studious detail, and the same class of capital is
occasionally used, though the majority are formed on the Norman cushion
capital. This form of capital had undergone a long series of changes; at
first the cushions were single on each face and the profile convex; then
they became gradually multiplied, but still convex below; then the
outline became concave; subsequently the cushions from semicircles
became a much greater portion of a circle, appearing like a series of
rolls bent into a concave outline, with deep hollows between them. This
occurs frequently at St. David’s. The next step is to decorate the
circular ends of these rolls. This is done at St. David’s, sometimes
with foliage, sometimes with little figures, as in medallions, and, as a
last step, before the final rejection of the type, the whole roll is
converted into foliage together. At St. David’s all these later steps
are exhibited in a very curious and interesting manner. Some of them may
be seen in the choir of Lichfield Cathedral, and at Hereford in the
eastern chapel.
[Illustration: Figs. 77, 78.--St. David’s.]
At St. David’s the triforium is united with the clerestory, something as
at St. Germain des Pres.[27] The clerestory has two bays to one arch
below, and has had sexpartite vaulting; not, as usual, embracing two
bays, but two of these semi-bays. It is interesting to find in this most
remote of the cathedrals of South Britain, and only just verging out of
the Romanesque, a degree of originality and of refinement equal to what
is met with in our best examples.
The circular portion of the Temple Church in
[Illustration: Fig. 79.--Temple Church. View of Circular Aisle.]
London is exactly contemporary with Canterbury, having been consecrated
in 1185, the year when that work was completed. It is somewhat less
advanced in style, possibly from a preference felt among the Templars
for the Romanesque. The pillars and main arches, with the vaulting
generally, it is true, are quite advanced Pointed, and are exceedingly
beautiful; but the triforium consists of an intersecting arcade, as at
St. Cross, and the windows are quite Norman; while, on the other hand,
the wall-arcading is pointed. The capitals are of several varieties;
most of them are of the simple water-leaf form so prevalent in the north
of England, while others are founded on the cushion and the _crochet_
forms.
It is exceedingly vexatious that the dates of buildings of this period
are so difficult to be ascertained.
Even where we know by whom they were erected, their founders were often
so long-lived as to render the information perfectly indefinite. Thus,
Pudsey presided over the see of Durham for forty years, Roger over York
for nearly thirty years, and Henry de Blois over Winchester forty-two
years; and Walkelin de Ferrers, who built the hall at Oakham Castle,
held the manor from 1161 to 1201.
Among the later works of the transition may be mentioned the eastern
part of Chichester Cathedral[28] (Fig. 80), a most beautiful example, of
which I give an internal view; and a yet nobler specimen is the eastern
portion of Tynemouth Abbey (Fig. 81). Of this I give a restored view, in
which I have supplied one of the bays which have fallen, and also the
vaulting, with its curious termination,
[Illustration: Fig. 80.--Chichester Cathedral, Eastern Part.]
[Illustration: Fig. 81.--The Choir, Tynemouth Abbey.]
[Illustration: Fig. 82.--Hexham Abbey. South side of Choir.]
against the east end. This, again, is a dateless work. Though externally
the flat Norman buttress is retained, it possesses internally no
Romanesque features, but is purely Pointed and thoroughly developed in
every part, though retaining what in England is the great distinguishing
characteristic of the transition--the square abacus. The details are
exceedingly rich and beautiful, while the vast thickness of its walls
gives to the interior a massive grandeur seldom equalled. Its situation
is ungenial, being on a dull promontory and close upon the shore, so
that every blast from the German Ocean whistles through its arches; yet,
chilling as its position is, no one of taste can visit it without
finding his heart warm up with admiration of its noble and beautiful
architecture, which is excelled by few, if any, examples of its period.
In the same northern district is Hexham Abbey, a noble example of what
may called the _transition_ from the _transition_ into the developed
Early English (Fig. 82). Farther north, again, we have noble examples at
Kelso, Jedburgh, and Dryburgh: the first having the round arch nearly
throughout; the second, as I have before said, famed for its exquisite
doorways; and the last having doorways equally refined, but remarkable
rather for their chaste simplicity than for their richness of detail. I
ought also to mention, among other northern examples, the Abbey of
Furness and the sister church of Cartmel; also the noble refectories at
Fountains and Rivaulx.
[Illustration: Fig. 83.--Bridlington, Yorkshire. Capital found in wall.]
To attempt, however, an enumeration of English examples would be an
endless task. So far from being a mere exotic, the country appears to
have been absolutely saturated with transitional buildings: and these,
so far from showing any of that inaptitude which would accompany the use
of a mere imported style, actually evince a degree of originality and a
revelry (if I may use such a term) in the new art which is perfectly
charming, and display beauties wholly different from any I have seen in
other countries. Not only is this the case in works on a grand scale,
but in the smallest village churches, in which we find the style reduced
to its simplest elements, yet exhibiting a sense of beauty and a
studious attention to detail which is quite surprising. One of the
features of these simpler productions is the plain unfoliated
capital--such as those at Fountains Abbey--but which, from its
simplicity, is of frequent use in village churches. Nothing could be
more severely plain, yet it possesses a degree of beauty equal in its
way to that of the most gorgeous capitals. We see from the examples I
give from Ripon and Fountains, how this passed off into the round
moulded capital which is so peculiar a characteristic of the English
Early Pointed.[29]
[Illustration: Fig. 84.--Capital, Ripon.]
[Illustration: Fig. 85.--Capital, Fountains.]
The distinctive characteristics of the productions of the English, as
compared with the French, transition, are somewhat difficult to define,
inasmuch as they begin in a manner the very reverse of that in which
they terminate; for at first they evince themselves in a stronger
resemblance to the preceding Romanesque,
[Illustration: Fig. 86.--St. Cross, Hampshire. South Aisle of Choir.]
while they terminate in a style differing from it more decidedly than
was the case with the perfected Early Pointed architecture of France.
The early transitional works of the royal domain of France appear to an
English eye more advanced than they really are, because the Romanesque
of that district had less of those characteristics which, to our eye,
distinguish the style, than those either of England or of other parts of
France. The designs of the archivolts--as M. Viollet le Duc says, were
sparing in ornament but liberal in mouldings; and if we compare Early
Pointed examples with the preceding Romanesque of the same district of
France, we shall find that the changes were comparatively slight. In
England the change was at first equally slight; but the Romanesque being
rich in characteristic decorations, it follows that, to us, our early
transition appears more Romanesque than that of France. Compare, for
instance, St. Cross with Sens; the proportion of round to pointed arches
in each differs but little. At Sens even the vaulting of the aisles is
round, while at St. Cross it is pointed; nor do they differ much in
their relation to the preceding Romanesque of the same districts, as
will be seen by comparing my sketch of an internal bay at Sens with some
I give of corresponding portions of French Romanesque churches; yet
Sens, being absolutely devoid of those Romanesque ornaments in which St.
Cross is so rich, strikes our eye as being more advanced.
We had, in fact, much more to be got rid of in our Romanesque than they
had in and about the Isle of France.
The remarkable converse of this is, that at the close of our transition
we had not only thrown off this excess of Romanesque characteristics,
but had gone beyond the French in altering those of a less palpable
kind, and introducing details distinct from those of the preceding
style. Thus our arch mouldings became far more rich and more studied in
their profile than those in France, which continued to be little more
than the repetition of a roll between two hollows, while ours were
composed of numerous and beautiful members; the proportions of our
windows became much more graceful than those customarily used in France,
and the basement mouldings were better. On the other hand, we were far
less liberal in the use of sculpture, and we generated a purely moulded
capital, which the French can scarcely be said to possess--thus, if I
may say so, giving ourselves the choice of a _Doric_, as well as a
_Corinthian_, variety in our columns; and, finally, we relinquished the
square form of the abacus, and made our capitals for the most part
round; so that, at the end of our transition, we had departed much more
widely from our own Romanesque than the French had from theirs; and
while the early French transitional works look more advanced than those
of a corresponding stage in England, the case is reversed at its close,
when the English examples appear more advanced than the French, as may
be seen by comparing the interior of the Galilee at Ely with the western
portals of Nôtre Dame, which are of some years’ later date.[30]
I will close my outline of the English transition by referring to four
examples which mark the limits of its duration, by showing how soon the
true Early English attained its perfect development. The examples I cite
for this purpose are the following:--