will of itself produce developments enough to distinguish the works of
our revival from those of old times, without our affecting to alter
those elements of our style which are not naturally affected by any such
conditions. I have said so much, however, on these subjects elsewhere,
that I will not venture to crowd their multitudinous details into this
lecture: only suggesting, in passing, that _domestic_ architecture by
its absolute demands _must_ of necessity suggest very many new
developments; that another wide field for novelty of treatment is
offered by the _wrought iron_ construction and _fire-proof_ construction
of our day; and that there still remains to us the solution of the noble
problem of the introduction and naturalisation of the _dome_ as a
feature of our revived style.
I will now say a very few words on another branch of the practice of a
Gothic architect: that which relates to the _repairs_ and _restoration_
of ancient buildings.
What I have said on the _study_ of ancient examples as the one and only
source of knowledge of architecture, of necessity carries with it the
assertion of the value of those examples, whether of a higher or of a
humbler class, and the condemnation of those who would deprive us of
these monuments of ancient art or tamper with their genuineness or
integrity. Yet, strange to say, a large number of the architects who
take in hand the so-called restoration of our ancient buildings seem
utterly devoid of all feeling for their value as authentic works of
olden time. I know no subject connected with architecture more mournful
and distressing than the way in which our old churches are but too
generally dealt with. Many of our large towns contain one or more
architects who systematically prey upon the surrounding churches, more
or less ruining everything they touch, and that without remorse, and
combating with the utmost energy every remonstrance against their
destructive habits. Nor are _they_ alone to blame. _The clergy too often
love to have it so._ If they can get their churches made smart, they
often seem to care little about the destruction of their antiquities;
and thus, between them and their architects, whole counties are becoming
denuded of a great part of the points of interest in their churches.
Nay, the man who commits the greatest devastations often earns the
greatest amount of commendation; and one who venerates an old building
and seeks to preserve its antiquities has to _fight for every inch of
ground_ against the opposition of the parties interested in the work.
These destructive tendencies are not limited to the minor features of
churches, but often involve the whole buildings, or large parts of them,
in destruction, and that without a shadow of necessity. One of these
destroyers of churches is called in, and at once condemns all he does
not fancy or which can be shown to be out of repair; the clergyman
appeals to the neighbourhood for funds to meet the sad state of things
portrayed by his architect; the whole or part of it is destroyed, and no
regard to its former design is paid in its reconstruction. This is going
on all over the country, with the applause of local magnates and the
laudations of the local papers: the architect and his patrons glory in
their success, while the country is robbed, one by one, of its
invaluable and irreplaceable antiquities.[94]
Even the societies formed for the study of our antiquities fail to lift
up their voices sufficiently against this fearful Vandalism, while many
who should be the guardians of our ancient churches use specious
arguments in confutation of the protests of those who dare to denounce
the atrocities which are perpetrated.
I have expressed myself pretty fully on the subject elsewhere, and have
spoken also about the spirit in which we should undertake such additions
to old churches as absolute necessity demands; and I am happy to say
that the Institute of British Architects have issued most judicious and
strongly-worded codes of suggestions as to the treatment of old
buildings, so that I trust the public will at some time be awakened to
the monstrous course which is being too generally followed. I go over
the ground on this occasion because I suppose myself to be addressing
many of those to whose keeping our churches and other old buildings will
be at a future time committed. I desire to warn you at the outset
against following the steps of those whose misdeeds I have been
proclaiming; and I close these lectures with an earnest entreaty that
you will enter upon practice with a solemn vow to yourselves to be the
determined and consistent protectors and conservators of those precious
relics of former days, now consecrated by antiquity, and from which
alone you learn the art which I am urging you to study.
“It were a pious work, I hear you say,
To prop the falling ruin, and to stay
The work of desolation. It may be
That ye say right: but, oh, _work tenderly_:
Beware lest _one_ worn feature ye efface;
Seek not to add _one_ touch of modern grace;
Handle with reverence each crumbling stone,
Respect the very lichens o’er it grown;
And bid each ancient monument to stand,
Supported e’en as with a filial hand.
’Mid all the light a happier day has brought
We work not yet as our forefathers wrought.”
END OF VOL. I.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] I fancy Mr. Freeman, who has perhaps more right than any living
author to a dogmatic opinion on this question, would think that I have
gone too far in this statement; and that the course of architecture was
less broken at this period than I imagined when writing the above. In
Italy, I have since come to the opinion, the history of architecture
was fairly continuous, in spite of Gothic invasions, etc. Although the
architecture at Pavia, etc., called by Mr. T. Hope “Lombardic,” has
been proved to be of dates far later than he supposed when giving it
that name, I feel convinced that truly Lombard architecture does exist,
and that of a type naturally succeeding and carrying on the style of
the earlier Basilicæ. At Lucca, for instance, though little attention
has been paid by writers on its churches, to anything earlier than the
Pisan work of the twelfth century, a careful examination will show that
many of them have a nucleus (and some far more) of a much earlier date,
reaching back to the time of the Lombard kings (G. G. S. 1878).
[2] See note on this subject in the previous lecture. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[3] _Ibid._
[4] Mr. Freeman, in vol. v. of his “Norman Conquest,” has treated
admirably of the architecture of this period, under the name of
“Primitive Romanesque.” (G. G. S. 1878.)
[5] I do not know whether the western bays of the Church of S. Pierre,
adjoining the Abbey Church at Jumiéges (which bays seem to have
belonged to the original chapter-house), belong to the older building
destroyed by the Normans, or to that rebuilt in 930 by Guillaume
Longue-Epeé. They are in style not Norman, but refined “Primitive
Romanesque.” (G. G. S. 1878.)
[6] There is an exception to this in the vaulting of curved spaces,
such as the circular aisle round an apse in which the ribs assume a
waved plan. (G. G. S.)
[7] See views of St. Faith’s Chapel, vol. ii. Lecture XIII.
[8] St. Cross, See Lecture III. p. 124.
[9] Interior View of St. Joseph’s, See Lecture III. p. 116.
[10] The length to which the Lecture has extended itself has rendered
it necessary for the present to pass over the German transition with
very slight notice. (G. G. S.)
[11] I ought to couple with the vaulting all wide-spanned arches; but
in a vaulted building they naturally go together. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[12] There is some uncertainty as to the building to which these
fragments belonged. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[13] A better acquaintance with southern buildings does not wholly
remove this difficulty. The Greek and Roman types seem to be a good
deal mixed in them. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[14] From a careful examination of the old capitals removed from the
church of St. Frond during the “Restoration,” I observe that they
are scarcely so distinct in their Byzantine character as those later
specimens which I have been speaking of. This makes me suspect that
throughout the twelfth century actually Byzantine carvers were employed
in France. Without this I cannot account for the continuance of the
Byzantine feeling in all its purity for so long a time. (G. G. S.)
[Illustration: Fig. 28.--Capitals from the north-west Portal, Lincoln
Cathedral.]
[15] We find the Byzantine feeling every here and there strongly
developed in our own transitional examples. I will mention as an
instance the north-west portal of Lincoln Cathedral, where it is
beautifully exhibited. (Fig. 28). (G. G. S.)
[16] See page 93, Fig. 38.
[17] The same construction appears to have also existed both at
Tewkesbury and at Pershore. (G. G. S.)
[18] See page 85, Fig. 27.
[19] 1858.
[20] It is curious to observe precisely the same art as in the eastern
part of Nôtre Dame exhibited in the tiny, but exquisite choir, close
by, of St. Julien le Pauvre.[21] Another small but highly valuable
example is the beautiful ruined church of St. Evremont at Creil. An
example of this style, which I have not seen much noticed in books, is
the cathedral at Geneva. I am unacquainted with its history, but should
suppose that a considerable interval occurred between its lower and
upper stages, the latter being of perfected Early Pointed, while the
former is as admirable a transitional work as I have anywhere met with.
It partakes in some parts of that classic tendency which is displayed
in the earlier parts of the cathedral at Lyons.
To follow out the subject through the South of France would not only be
useless in illustrating the English transition, but would, compressed
into the smallest space, be a subject for an entire lecture. I cannot,
however, abstain from just alluding to the noble manner in which the
style adapts itself to Domed architecture at Angoulême and throughout
its neighbourhood, and to the Quasi-domed architecture at Le Puy.
The latter has been illustrated in an excellent paper by Mr. Street,
read before the Institute of British Architects. The southern form of
the transition must have been nobly exemplified by the church of St.
Gilles near Nismes, before that charming church became ruined in the
religious wars of the sixteenth century. The entire plan of the church
still remains intelligible, as does most of the superstructure; and it
is difficult to imagine anything more noble. The three western portals
are better known, and are truly magnificent. Parallel to them are the
western portal and the cloister of St. Trophimus[22] at Arles. The
church at St. Gilles retains the date of its commencement, 1116, which,
however, seems too early for its architecture. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[21] See Lecture VIII., p. 320, Figs. 183, 184, 185, 186.
[22] See Lecture VI., p. 229.
[23] The carving of the more advanced style here described belongs
probably to the beginning of the thirteenth century. M. Viollet le
Duc seems to think that the western façade was not begun till about
1218; but I think it must have been earlier, because the corbels and
upper jamb-stones of the south-western portal, unlike the rest, are of
exquisite Byzantine workmanship. (G. G. S. 1878).
[24] A more careful examination shows that far the larger part of
Darlington is of later date, using up, as would appear, details
prepared by Pudsey, who died before the church had made any great
progress. (G. G. S.)
[25] There is work of the Canterbury type in the double chapel to
the keep of Dover Castle, and interpolated work by the same hand in
the church hard by, in which Saxon work is re-used as material for
transitional work. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[26] The dates are given in Professor Willis’s excellent paper on the
Abbey. They are from 1186 onwards. The older Abbey was burnt down in
1186. The Chapel now known as that of St. Joseph, but which was really
the Lady Chapel, was first rebuilt, and the church followed immediately
afterwards. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[27] The clerestory and triforium of St. Germain des Pres have
undergone some alterations from the original forms. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[28] This work at Chichester was executed at the close of the century,
after the fire of 1186; but Professor Willis has shown that some early
Pointed work of a very marked character, which exists in the western
part of the Lady Chapel, must have been erected previously to that
event.
[29] This unfoliated capital I have since noticed in the Church
at Tulle in Limousin, where simplicity was suggested by the
material--granite. (G. G. S.)
[30] I read a paper on the English Transition, especially viewed in
reference to its English and French elements, before the Archæological
Institution at Canterbury in 1875. See their Journal. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[31] For illustration see Lecture IV., Fig. 109.
[32] For illustration see Lecture V., Fig. 116.
[33] It is fair to say that Professor Willis doubted the date given to
this Galilee. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[34] In the church of St. Francis at Assisi, a German and an Italian
architect worked together. The former imported into the work a German
version of the French Pointed style, while the latter retained the
semi-classic Romanesque of his own country--the two indefinitely
commingled. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[35] The last sentence, though expressing a general truth, must not be
taken too literally; for, though it is the great principle of Gothic
architecture to decorate construction, this may be effected simply or
richly, and with or without sculpture or carving, according to the
requirements of the case. (G. G. S.)
[36] I remember conducting for the first time M. Reichensperger through
Westminster Abbey, being surprised at his objecting to some details
as “Bysantinisch.” This arose from his having mentally adopted later
styles as his models, in which no trace of Romanesque origin remains.
(G. G. S. 1878.)
[37] See Lecture VII. page 248.
[38] See capital from S. Eusèbe, Auxerre, Lecture III., page 101; also
capitals from Montmartre, Lecture VIII., page 319.
[39] See capitals from Nôtre Dame, Saint Chapelle, etc., Lecture III.
pages 102 and 103.
[40] I have since discovered that the great four and five light windows
of the chapter-house at Westminster were finished in 1253. These are of
the fullest development, and have cusped heads to their lights. (G. G.
S.)
For illustration, see Interior of Chapter-House, Lecture XIV. Vol. ii.
[41] For illustration, see Lecture V., Fig. 122.
[42] For illustration, see Lecture V., Fig. 116.
[43] I remember, in the report of one of the parish meetings, Mr.
Barclay having proposed the restoration of the glorious old nave, an
intelligent parishioner exclaiming, “What! keep them great elephants’
foots?” (G. G. S. 1878.)
[44] I am glad to learn that the drawings _are_ preserved, and that
they will, D.V., be published by Mr. Dollman. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[45] Or rather, in some respects, of Beauvais. The two were, no doubt,
jointly referred to by the Cologne architect. (G. G. S.)
[46] Since writing this I have had the privilege of restoring it, and
in these days of ante-restoration I am glad that so clear a record had
been kept of its previous condition. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[47] See Lecture VIII., p. 312, Figs. 178, 179.
[48] See Lecture VIII., p. 313, Fig. 180.
[49] Much discussion has taken place as to who this Pietro--“Petrus
Romanus Civis”--was. Virtue, as quoted by Walpole, says it was
Pietro Cavallini, but he was only a child when this work was done.
The ciforium in the Church of St. Paul without the Walls bears
this inscription; †HOC OPUS FECIT ARNOLFUS CUM SUO SOCIO
PETRO!! Monsegnor Xavier Barbier de Montault, who wrote a
chapter for Mr. Parker’s work on Rome, says that this was Pietro
Cavallini. If so, he was probably the father of the more celebrated
artist. The date of the work last named is 1285, being sixteen years
later than that at Westminster.
[50] For east and west windows, see “Digression concerning Windows,”
inserted between Lectures VII. and VIII.
[51] For illustration, see Lecture IV., Fig. 109.
[52] More recently, on opening out other walled-up arches, etc., the
greater part of this substructure has been found. The fragments--about
2000 in number--have been fitted together and built up in their old
place. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[53] Since this was written, the church has gained additional interest
through the opening out of the wall paintings, which probably formed a
sort of reredos over each of the small altars which stood against the
Norman piers in the nave. (G. G. S.)
[54] This is really somewhat later. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[55] This notion has since been entirely disproved, and the architect
proved to have been a member of an English family. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[56] For illustration, see Lecture IV., Fig. 87.
[57] See Lecture III. p. 121, Fig. 82.
[58] For a bay of this chapter-house, see “Digression concerning
Windows,” inserted between Lectures VII. and VIII. Fig. 170.
[59] See Lecture XV., vol. ii.
[60] For illustration, see Lecture IV. p. 164.
[61] The practical and universally acknowledged success of the Assize
Courts at Manchester, as compared with those at Liverpool, speaks
volumes as to the _rationale_ of our style. (G. G. S.)
[62] It is amusing to observe the triumphant tone with which modern
writers delight to parade the bits of untruthfulness which they chance
to find in ancient Classic and other structures. I wonder whether the
old architects would enjoy the compliment if they could see works of
_our_ day. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[63] For illustration, see Lecture III., Fig. 81.
[64] See Lecture IV., Fig. 87.
[65] The manner in which our glass painters turn out these
fragments--more precious than gold--to make way for their (often vile)
memorial windows is only paralleled by the ruthlessness with which they
tear away the iron-work which once sustained the painted glass. (G. G.
S. 1878).
[66] There seems to be a perfect crusade going on against these relics
which give such a charm to our villages, though nothing shows more
painfully the contrast between the tastefulness of former times and the
tastelessness of the present than a comparison between these despised
remains and the structures by which they are constantly being replaced.
(G. G. S.)
[67] Or how were stone gables made to fit themselves to a _thatched_
roof? (G. G. S. 1878).
[68] A practice now happily _long_ discontinued. (G. G. S. 1878).
[69] See Lecture III., pp. 107, 108.
[70] See Lecture V., Fig. 122.
[71] To follow up these studies well, it will be desirable to have an
introduction to the authorities, which may exempt you from a galling
system of _espionage_ for many years prevalent in this cathedral. (G.
G. S. 1878.)
[72] See Lecture V., Fig. 113.
[73] See Lecture XII., vol. ii.
[74] See Lecture XIV., vol. ii.
[75] See Lecture III., Fig. 79; and Lecture V., Fig. 110.
[76] See Lecture V., p. 183, Fig. 115; also “Digression concerning
Windows” inserted between Lectures VII. and VIII.
[77] It is melancholy to think how our privileges are neglected! The
Architectural Museum itself is a _perfect mine_ of the finest objects
of study; yet how insufficient are the uses made of it. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[78] Since I wrote this--eleven years ago--the tide has turned. We are
too apt to follow _rages_ and mere _fashions_. We were, when I wrote,
becoming too French; we have since got to think of French architecture
with a self-righteous horror. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[79] For illustrations, see Lecture III., p. 82, Figs. 20, 21.
[80] Many original capitals from the Sainte Chapelle are lying in the
open air in the gardens of the Hôtel Cluny. The most precious morsels
which can be conceived! (G. G. S. 1878.)
[81] When I wrote this, they were double-locked in the old
_schatzzimmer_, but they are now displayed in the triforium gallery.
(G. G. S. 1878.)
[82] I mean the Romanesque architecture of _Lombardy_: not that of the
_Lombard Kings_, which was probably a mere version of the Basilican.
See note on this subject to Lecture I. (G. G. S. 1878).
[83] The small secular Basilica, called the “_Basilica Jovis_” built, I
think, by Domitian on the Palatine Hill, proves more clearly than any
other building I know how directly our churches are derived from the
old Halls of Justice. The recent excavations have shown both the marble
_cancelli_ which parted off the apse, and the altar within it for the
administrative oath. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[84] Surely we may claim it now! (G. G. S. 1878.)
[85] For illustrations, see Lecture V. p. 199, Fig. 121.
[86] For illustration, see “Digression concerning Windows,” inserted
between Lectures VII. and VIII.
[87] So rapidly do _fashions_ change that, though when I wrote the
above I expected to be found fault with for speaking so well of _late_
styles, I am now far behind the age! Sixteen years earlier I had done
the same at the risk, nay, with the certainty, of being pronounced a
heretic by some of the very persons who now think the latest Mediæval
art the best, and that far later than Mediæval _better still_. (G. G.
S. 1878.)
[88] Those who most despised the less _foreign_ and the less _early_
men, are, in many cases, those who have subsequently rejected all that
was foreign, and all that was early; if not yet, all that is Mediæval.
(G. G. S. 1878.)
[89] I fear my love of the early styles has led me to be unfaithful to
my theory. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[90] The French variety of our style has not only been vulgarised by
_exaggeration_, but still more by _ignorance_ and _incapacity_. The
hideousness of the capitals constantly palmed off as _French_ would
surpass belief if we were not used to it! (G. G. S. 1878.)
[91] I must mention, as noble exceptions to this, the restoration, by
Mr. Hardman, of the east window of Okeover Church, Derbyshire; and of
two windows in the north aisle of Gloucester Cathedral, which are works
deserving the highest praise. (G. G. S.)
[92] I fear this term only applies to him in respect of his liberality
in this particular. (G. G. S. 1878.)
[93] I cannot but feel that our glass painters fail grievously in real
progress. Even those who are really acquainted with their art too
frequently so _scamper_ over it as to render their figures and subjects
_mere caricatures_. The majority really know nothing about their art,
and these are the favourites with the public! Another section, who
really understand what art is, and are able to practise it, proudly set
at naught its harmony with the architecture in which it is set. (G. G.
S. 1878.)
[94] If the local and other architects who feel themselves to be open
to this charge would reconsider their ways, and determine henceforth to
devote themselves to the conservation of all the antiquities which pass
through their hands, they would earn and receive the hearty support of
all who love and value our ancient buildings, as well as securing the
gratitude of future generations. (G. G. S.)