THE INVASION OF THE FOREIGN STYLE.
In order properly to understand the position of the Elizabethan mansion
in the story of architectural development, it is necessary to examine
the work which intervenes between it and the last of the Gothic period.
[Illustration: 1.--TOMB OF PRINCE ARTHUR (D. 1502) IN WORCESTER
CATHEDRAL.]
The first work with Renaissance detail that was done in England was the
tomb of King Henry VII.--the actual altar-tomb, not the metal screen
enclosing it. There is no foreign influence to be detected either in
the screen or in the wonderful fan-tracery vault that spreads itself
above (Plate I). These are essentially English productions, and yet
there are certain parts of them which would lend themselves readily to
the new-fashioned detail which was about to invade our shores; parts
which in subsequent buildings were actually affected by it. But so
far, that is up to the year 1509, when the king died, the chapel being
still unfinished, there is no Renaissance detail. Nor is there any in
the fine chantry in Worcester Cathedral, wherein King Henry's eldest
son, Prince Arthur, who died in 1502, lies buried (Fig. 1). The utmost
that can be said is that here, as in the chapel at Westminster, the
Gothic work is preparing to succumb to the new influence. It has been
suggested that the king's own tomb was erected subsequently to that of
his mother, the Countess of Richmond, who also lies in the Abbey. But
the question is one of little importance; no long period can separate
the two, and the important point is that the actual invasion of the
foreign style is a well-marked event, the circumstances attending it
are on record, its results still survive in an excellent state of
preservation.
[Illustration: 2.--TOMB OF ONE OF THE COKAYNE FAMILY, ASHBOURNE
CHURCH, DERBYSHIRE. FIFTEENTH CENTURY.]
Henry VII. says in his will, dated 31st March, 1509, that he had
arranged for his tomb to be made in a certain manner,[1] and from other
sources we gather that the men who were to do the work were certain
English craftsmen, of whom Lawrence Imber, carver; Drawswerd, sheriff
of York; Humphrey Walker, founder; Nicholas Ewen, coppersmith; Robert
Virtue, Robert Jenins, and John Lebons, master masons, were the chief.
The last name is the only one with a foreign appearance, but it is a
curious and rather significant fact that the design had been made by
one "Master Pageny," as he was called by his English acquaintances,
but whom his own countrymen called Paganino. No other work of Master
Pageny's is known in England, but it seems tolerably clear that he is
the same Paganino who designed the tomb of the French King Charles
VIII. at St. Denis, and that Henry's tomb was to have been like it.[2]
The project, however, fell through in consequence of the death of the
king, and the passing of the control of affairs into the hands of his
son, Henry VIII. The new monarch discarded the old design entirely,
and entrusted the work to Pietro Torrigiano, or Peter Torrisany, as
he became on English lips. Torrigiano's design departed widely from
English traditions. The leading idea of recumbent figures upon an
altar-tomb was retained--this idea indeed held the field for another
three-quarters of a century--but the old practice of adorning the sides
of the tomb with cusped panels, or figures of saints in niches, or
angels holding shields of arms (Fig. 2), was abandoned; and instead of
the restrained architectural treatment of the English tradition, where
the figures were solitary, and every fold of drapery harmonised with
the main architectural members, Torrigiano gave us the free treatment
of the Italian sculptors. The general arrangement of the panels is
simple enough (Plate II.). There are three circular wreaths on each
of the longer sides of the tomb, divided by Italian pilasters adorned
with arabesques, into which the rose and portcullis of the Tudors
are introduced. A rose also fills each of the four spandrils formed
by the circular wreaths. These wreaths were new to English eyes; so,
too, was the treatment of the spandrils, where the flower is simply
applied to the triangular space, instead of appearing to be a growth
on the structure itself in the old Gothic way (Fig. 3). The panels
themselves contain figures in action, figures which have cast away
conventional attitudes and stiffness of attire, and comport themselves
in the most natural way imaginable. Henry's patron saints are there to
the number of ten, but instead of standing in niches, statuesque and
motionless, they are grouped in pairs, every pair seeming interested
in a common subject, instead of each individual being rapt in solitary
contemplation. As there are six panels, the ten patron saints are
supplemented by two other figures--the Virgin with the Child, and
St. Christopher. Another novelty appears in the shape of the four
cherubs poised at each corner of the tomb; they have no niches or
other architectural background; they are detached pieces of sculpture,
self-reliant; their purpose, which they no longer fulfil, was to hold
banners, but these have long disappeared.
[1] Britton's _Architectural Antiquities_, Vol. II.
[2] _Archæological Journal_, 1894, "On the work of Florentine Sculptors
in England," by Alfred Higgins, F.S.A.
[Illustration: 3.--HENRY VII.'S TOMB. DETAIL.]
[Illustration: 4.--TOMB OF JOHN HARRINGTON (D. 1524), EXTON CHURCH,
RUTLAND.]
[Illustration: 5.--TOMB OF THOMAS CAVE (D. 1558), STANFORD CHURCH,
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.]
[Illustration: 6.--TOMB OF THOMAS CAVE (D. 1558). END PANEL.]
[Illustration: 7.--TOMB OF SIR GEORGE VERNON (D. 1567), BAKEWELL
CHURCH, DERBYSHIRE.]
The change of idea is complete, but it is a change that never took
hold of English craftsmen. They adopted the circular wreaths and the
arabesqued pilasters, and so far as those features are concerned
we see in this tomb the prototype of many that followed after. But
the figures in action do not appear again. English tradition was too
strong for the Italian influence to overcome it, and the principal way
in which it was affected was that the panels became frequently divided
by pilasters instead of by moulded members; and that the angels, which
had hitherto been solitary and devout, took on the attitude of heraldic
supporters, and assumed a more mundane appearance, or endeavoured to
imitate the amorini of Italian craftsmen--an effort for which they
were, as a rule, too elderly.
[Illustration: PLATE II.HENRY VII.'S TOMB IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY.
SOUTH SIDE (1516).]
[Illustration: 8.--TOMB OF SIR THOMAS ANDREW (D. 1563), CHARWELTON
CHURCH, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.]
The dividing pilasters were sometimes nothing more than spiral columns,
and such a column is occasionally the only sign of the new feeling. In
the tomb of John Harrington, who died in 1524 (Fig. 4), a spiral column
at the angles and a certain stiffness in the cusped panels indicate
the impending change. This change is still more marked in the Cave
tomb (Fig. 5) at Stanford Church, where (in 1558) the sides have three
circular panels containing, however, shields of arms, not figures,
and the upper end exhibits the family shield supported by two angels.
On the other hand, the opposite end (Fig. 6) shows the family of the
deceased gentleman in a number of figures treated with a stiffness of
pose and a conventionality of attire that still belong to the ancient
style. There is a very similar tomb at Charwelton to Sir Thomas
Andrew, who died in 1563 (Fig. 8). In the tomb of Sir George Vernon
(Fig. 7), who died in 1567, the angle pilasters, with their vases and
portcullises in low relief, recall those on Henry VII.'s tomb. The
middle shield on the end is surrounded by a circular wreath, while the
shape of the shield and the strange form of the dividing pilasters show
a still further departure from the old detail. In the Bradbourne tomb
of 1581 (Fig. 9) panels have disappeared altogether, and the sides of
the tomb are occupied by figures of the children, who hold in a stiff
and tiring manner, shields setting forth their marriages. There is a
rather curious survival in the tomb of Elizabeth Drury at Hawstead
Church, in Suffolk, where, as late as 1610, a shield of arms is
supported by two amorini (Fig. 10). All these examples, selected from
the tombs to be found in village churches, and covering a period of
three-quarters of a century, tend to show that the Italianizing of the
English workman, in this branch of art at any rate, was as incomplete
as it was slow. The craftsman was, however, aware that a new influence
was at work, and he was prepared to succumb to it where circumstances
were favourable. In certain districts circumstances were favourable,
and accordingly in parts of the eastern and southern counties, notably
at Layer Marney, in Essex, there are tombs in which the detail is
more decidedly wrought after Italian models (Fig. 11 and Plate III.),
although even here the difference is so great that any of them would
look strangely out of place if transported to a church in Italy.
[Illustration: 9.--TOMB OF BRADBOURNE (D. 1581), ASHBOURNE
CHURCH, DERBYSHIRE.]
[Illustration: 10.--FROM THE TOMB OF ELIZABETH DRURY (D. 1610),
HAWSTEAD CHURCH, SUFFOLK.]
The eastern and southern counties appear to have been specially
affected by the new movement, for we find considerable traces of it
scattered over wide areas, and affecting not only small objects like
tombs, but permanent structures. We shall presently see it at Layer
Marney Tower, and among other places at East Barsham and Great Snoring
in Suffolk; while in Wymondham Church, in Norfolk, the sedilia is made
of what appear to be fragments of a tomb much resembling those at
Layer Marney in character (Fig. 12). In the southern counties, Sutton
Place, near Guildford, abounds in Anglo-Italian detail; some of the
woodwork at the Vyne, in Hampshire, is also affected by it. There is
some very interesting work of the same nature at the Chapel of the
Holy Ghost, at Basingstoke; while at Christchurch, in the same county,
the chantry of the Countess of Salisbury is strongly touched with the
Italian influence, and at St. Cross, near Winchester, are the very
beautiful fragments of a Renaissance screen (Plate VII.). Winchester
itself has some good work in the choir of the Cathedral; and still
further west, at Bingham Melcombe, in Dorset, there is a charming gable
of mixed English and Italian detail. At Lacock Abbey, in Wiltshire,
there is a considerable amount of Renaissance work, wrought when the
abbey buildings were converted into a dwelling-house soon after the
dissolution of the monasteries.
[Illustration: 11.--TOMB OF HENRY, LORD MARNEY (D. 1523), LAYER
MARNEY CHURCH, ESSEX.]
[Illustration: PLATE III.
DETAILS FROM THE TOMB OF HENRY, LORD MARNEY.]
Some of this work is in stone and some in wood, but some of it is in
terra-cotta, and it would be an interesting task to ascertain why this
pronounced detail should have been largely confined to these particular
districts. The stone and woodwork might have been carved by itinerant
Italians wandering some distance from their ports of debarkation; but
the terra-cotta must have been cast, and need not have been cast
close to where it was fixed, but abroad, and thence conveyed to almost
any part of the country. Nevertheless, none of the work entirely loses
its English character, whether it was done abroad or not. Some of it
must certainly have been wrought by Italians, but about much of it the
general impression produced is that it was done by Englishmen with
Italian proclivities, rather than by Italians under English orders.
[Illustration: PLATE IV.
CHAPEL OF THE RED MOUNT, KING'S LYNN.
FAN-VAULTING.
COWDRAY HOUSE, SUSSEX.
FAN-VAULTING OF PORCH.]
[Illustration: 12.--FROM THE SEDILIA, WYMONDHAM CHURCH,
NORFOLK.]
[Illustration: 13.--COWDRAY HOUSE, SUSSEX. VAULTING RIB TO PORCH
(CIR. 1540).]
Nor was the foreign detail on the stone simply added to the English
work after the native craftsmen had finished. It was not that the
Englishman completed his work and then invited the Italian to come
and do the carving after his own manner, but the two influences are
curiously mixed. Take the fan-vaulting of the porch at Cowdray (Plate
IV.), for instance. In general appearance it is of the same family as
other fan-vaulting, of which the roof of the Chapel of the Red Mount
at King's Lynn may be taken as a specimen. But, as might be expected,
it is in the susceptible parts of the stonework that the foreign
influence first shows itself,--not in the construction, but in the
ornament. The spandrils at Cowdray are filled with carving; some of it
is foliage, treated in the Late Gothic manner, but in one appears the
head of a winged cherub, clearly not of English but Italian descent.
The main ribs of the vaulting, too, have an Italian arabesque worked
on them, and the point to be observed here is that the section of the
rib is not of the usual type, but is expressly designed to receive the
arabesque (Fig. 13).
[Illustration: 14.--CHANTRY OF THE COUNTESS OF SALISBURY,
CHRISTCHURCH, HAMPSHIRE, FROM THE NORTH AISLE (CIR. 1529).]
[Illustration: PLATE V.
THE SALISBURY CHANTRY, CHRISTCHURCH.
VIEW FROM THE CHOIR.]
[Illustration: 15.--THE SALISBURY CHANTRY, CHRISTCHURCH. DETAIL OF
CARVING.]
[Illustration: 16.--PRIOR DRAPER'S CHANTRY, CHRISTCHURCH. HEAD OF
DOORWAY (1529).]
[Illustration: 17.--CHRISTCHURCH, HAMPSHIRE. MISERERE SEATS.]
In the Countess of Salisbury's chantry at Christchurch it is much
easier to imagine the Italian carver following the English mason, and
adding his ornament to the other's work, for nearly all of it lies
in sunk panels, the highest parts of the carving being on the same
face as the surrounding margin: that is to say, the Italian found
plain surfaces between the moulded members left for him to carve, and
one set of these plain surfaces, on the side next to the choir, he
did not carve--they still remain bare. Take away the ornament, and
the chantry in general design and treatment is Late English-Gothic
(Fig. 14), such as no Italian would have produced, if we except the
topmost stage on the choir side, where there are two domed pinnacles
of rather clumsy and unintelligible design (Plate V.). One of these
has a curious feature--the somewhat vulgar product of the later
Italian carvers--namely, the lower drapery and the feet of a figure
ascending into clouds, all executed in complete relief. On the north
side, next to the aisle, are some shields in the spandrils between
the niches (Plate VI.), carved in the Italian spirit, and these can
hardly have been added afterwards, but must have been an integral
part of the design. The arabesques on the vertical shafts and in the
horizontal bands might very well have been carved by a man put on for
that purpose only (Fig. 15). Altogether, it is difficult to adjust
with any accuracy the claims of the English and Italian workmen; it
would almost seem as though they worked together, or at any rate with a
cordial understanding between them. The same may be said of the screen
to Prior Draper's chantry (dated 1529) in the same church. The general
design is Gothic, and while the arabesque enrichments may have been
added afterwards, and the spandrils of the flat-pointed door, the same
can hardly be said of the corbels to the niches over it (Fig. 16). The
cresting along the top of this screen exactly resembles that over the
screens at the sides of the choir at Winchester Cathedral, except
that the latter has not a battlemented finish (Fig. 20).
[Illustration: PLATE VI.
THE SALISBURY CHANTRY, CHRISTCHURCH.
DETAIL OF NICHES ON NORTH SIDE.]
Although it is not difficult to imagine an Italian carving this
stonework at Christchurch, it is not quite so easy to attribute the
interesting choir-stalls to him or a compatriot, for the Gothic feeling
is too pronounced, and the angel and cherubs are not lissom and
graceful enough to have descended from an Italian sky.
The divisions between the miserere seats (Fig. 17) are thoroughly
Gothic in general treatment and in their mouldings, but in the
carving the Italian hand shows itself, although subdued to the Gothic
surroundings in which it worked. Some of the desk ends are traceried
and cusped, and some have vases and foliage after the Italian
manner. But here again the two _putti_ which turn their backs in so
unceremonious a way (Fig. 18) can hardly be the work of Italian chisels.
[Illustration: 18.--CHRISTCHURCH, HAMPSHIRE. BENCH-END IN CHOIR.]
It is equally difficult to assign the beautiful panelling in the long
gallery at the Vyne to a foreigner (Fig. 19); there is so much English
feeling about it. The work conveys the impression that the carver was
more at home with his linen panels than with the Italian flourishes
with which he supplemented them; but the single panel over the door
is evidently the work of a hand thoroughly familiar with the Italian
method. We see the same mixed character wherever we look; we can point
to no work--not even Henry VII.'s tomb--and say, "This is wholly
Italian." There is always a strong English feeling, and sometimes it is
only a touch here and there which shows the foreign influence.
[Illustration: 19.--DOORWAY AND PANELLING IN THE GALLERY AT THE
VYNE, HAMPSHIRE (BEFORE 1530).]
[Illustration: 20.--SCREEN ON NORTH SIDE OF CHOIR, WINCHESTER
CATHEDRAL (WITH MORTUARY CHEST), 1525.]
The same remark applies to the stone screens at the sides of the choir
at Winchester (Fig. 20). They are Gothic in general treatment, but a
little Italian carving is introduced in the cresting along the top.
They were the work of Bishop Fox in 1525, who evidently had a hankering
after the foreign ornament in his life, although his own chantry,
in which he lies buried, is free from it; for in the neighbouring
church at St. Cross are the fragments of some very beautiful screens
containing charming Italian work (Plate VII.). The history of these
fragments is not known, but from the occurrence in them of the pelican,
which was Bishop Fox's badge, they seem to be due to him, and they
may possibly have come from the cathedral itself. They do not belong
to their present situation, and one of the main posts is worked with
a return at a very obtuse angle, indicating some such polygonal
disposition as the east end of the cathedral has. On the top of the
choir-screens in the cathedral are placed six oak chests, called
mortuary chests, procured by Fox, in which are deposited the bones of
various benefactors. They are of Italian workmanship (except two which
replaced the old ones in the seventeenth century), and are suggestive
as being one of the sources of inspiration to native carvers. One of
them is shown in Fig. 20, and just behind it can be seen the cornice
of the chantry of Bishop Gardiner, who died in 1555. The portion
visible is of well-developed classic character, and indicates how the
use of the foreign forms had progressed during the thirty years that
had elapsed since Fox's time. Even here, however, the pinnacle at the
corner--the head of a heraldic animal on a pedestal--shows how the
designer was unwilling or unable to shake off all the trammels of his
native style.
[Illustration: 21.--CANOPY OF STALLS, HENRY VII.'S CHAPEL,
WESTMINSTER.]
At Basing Church, in Hampshire, there is yet another example of the
same limited use of Italian detail in the Paulet tombs, which are
constructed in the thickness of the side-walls of the chancel (Plate
VII.). The arches over the tombs and the doorway in the wall are all
flat-pointed, and the spandrils are filled with Renaissance carving,
which, in the case of the large arches, surrounds the arms of the
founder. Except for these touches, and for the cresting along the top,
which recalls that at Winchester, the detail is all Gothic. The large
panel in the wall over the doorway seems to be of later date.
[Illustration: PLATE VII.
PART OF SCREEN, ST. CROSS, WINCHESTER (PROBABLY DUE TO BISHOP FOX, WHO
DIED 1528.)
PAULET TOMB, BASING CHURCH, HAMPSHIRE.]
Another interesting piece of work of this period is found in the stalls
of Henry VII.'s chapel at Westminster. The canopies (Fig. 21) are quite
Gothic in character, but of a rather florid description, and although
there is no actual Renaissance detail, there is a tendency towards
it. The caps of the pilasters are also Late Gothic, while the columns
are of that honeycomb pattern which is a sign of change towards the new
fashion (Fig. 22). There is woodwork of a somewhat similar character at
Winchester in Langton's chapel, and in Prior Silkstede's pulpit (1520).
The Spring pew in Lavenham Church, Suffolk, is another instance of the
late treatment of woodwork. There are niches, canopies, fan-vaulting,
and cusped tracery (Fig. 23), but a closer inspection shows that the
tracery has completely departed from the simple lines of Gothic work,
and has assumed fantastic forms combined of twisted strands and foliage
(Fig. 24), while the columns are honeycombed or twisted into spirals.
[Illustration: 22.--DETAIL FROM STALLS, HENRY VII.'S CHAPEL,
WESTMINSTER.]
[Illustration: 23.--THE SPRING PEW, LAVENHAM CHURCH, SUFFOLK.]
These examples all tend to show that the old traditions died hard.
The new ideas were cautiously accepted, and were utilised to help
the existing methods rather than to supplant them. Hitherto it
has been fittings, or chantries, or tombs which have furnished
examples--comparatively small and isolated pieces of work which
naturally lent themselves to experiments. But we find the same general
treatment in larger and more important efforts; the native tradition
still holds the field, but traces of the new manner are to be found in
the spandril of an archway, the termination of a label, or the pendants
of a roof. Compare the roof of the hall at Eltham Palace (Fig. 25)
with that of the great hall at Hampton Court (1534-35). The roof at
Eltham is still Gothic, without a touch of the Renaissance; the roof
at Hampton Court is also still Gothic in conception and construction,
but in the most susceptible parts--the pendants, the spandrils, and the
corbels--the new influence makes itself felt (Fig. 26). These pendants
are quite in the new style, and yet were carved by an Englishman, named
Richard Rydge, of London.[3] The spandrils likewise are filled with
Renaissance ornaments carved by Michael Joyner, among which the King's
Arms and the "King's beasts" appear, treated in the manner customary in
Late Gothic work; the Tudor badges are also carved on the pendants and
corbels, amid the cherubs and balusters and foliage which go to compose
the Italian ornament (Fig. 27).
[Illustration: 24.--DETAIL FROM THE SPRING PEW, LAVENHAM CHURCH,
SUFFOLK.]
[Illustration: PLATE VIII.
KING'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.
SCREEN IN THE CHAPEL (1532-6).]
Another fine piece of woodwork, which was being executed
contemporaneously with the hall roof at Hampton, was the magnificent
rood screen in King's College Chapel, Cambridge (Plate VIII.). There
is no record as to who did this work, nor when it was done; but the
evidence of the arms, initials, and badges upon it, which are those of
Henry VIII. and Anne Boleyn, fixes its date between 1532 and 1536. It
has been called the finest piece of woodwork this side the Alps, and
its exquisite design and workmanship quite justify the description,
and even incline one to omit the limiting line. It is more completely
Italian in treatment than any other work of the time, and there is
very little trace of Gothic influence. All the mouldings are classic,
whereas in the roof at Hampton Court even the Italian pendants have a
Gothic feeling in their mouldings. There is, however, a considerable
similarity in feeling between the pendants in both cases, and it should
be borne in mind that the work at the two places was being carried on
simultaneously. Richard Rydge, of London, who carved the pendants at
Hampton Court, may have had a hand in the King's College screen; but
it is practically certain that the general design and most of the work
must have been done by Italians, and the whole screen must be regarded
as an isolated example, complete in itself, not growing out of anything
that went before it, nor developing into anything afterwards.
[3] _History of Hampton Court Palace_, by Ernest Law, Vol. I.
[Illustration: 25.--ROOF OF HALL, ELTHAM PALACE, KENT.]
[Illustration: 26.--ROOF OF THE GREAT HALL, HAMPTON COURT
(1534-35).]
[Illustration: 27.--DETAILS FROM THE ROOF OF THE GREAT HALL,
HAMPTON COURT.]
[Illustration: 28.--HAMPTON COURT. HEAD OF DOOR TO GREAT HALL.]
The early work at Hampton Court, that is, the work of Wolsey and Henry
VIII., executed between 1514 and 1540, is typical of the prevailing
manner. This building was the most important one of its time. It was
built by the magnificent Cardinal as his principal residence, where he
could live amid quiet and healthy surroundings, and yet be in close
touch with London, which was the centre of political activity. Wolsey
lived in more than regal state, and the enormous size and extraordinary
splendour of his palace is testified to by many foreigners of
distinction who resorted to him on some of the innumerable matters in
which he was the controlling spirit. This great palace he presented
to the king some time before his fall, and the king altered and
enlarged it still further, and made it, as was to be expected, one
of his chief residences. Here, then, we may expect to find the best
work that wealth and skill could produce; here we may fairly look for
typical work of the time. What is the character of the work that was
being executed between 1514 and 1540? In its essentials it is Gothic
of a late type, with just such touches of Italian detail as have been
already mentioned. The structure is of dark red brick, with stone
dressings; the detail is of the simplest; the windows are generally
small, and have flat-pointed heads. Whatever elaboration there is, is
chiefly confined to central features, such as the gateways on the great
axial line. The chimneys are of cut and moulded brick; the archways are
vaulted with fan tracery vaulting; the large windows of the hall are
traceried and cusped; everything in its main outline is Gothic. But in
certain parts the ornament is of Renaissance character. There are a
number of terra-cotta roundels built into the walls, which came from
Italy, and were made to the Cardinal's order. There is a terra-cotta
tablet of his arms supported by _putti_ beautifully modelled--this was
also probably an importation; it has no essential connection with its
surroundings. The same may also be said of the more roughly modelled
panels on either side of the doorway to the chapel, which contain
the royal arms impaling those of Henry's third queen, Jane Seymour,
supported by very mundane angels. But there is also, in other parts of
the building, a little Renaissance detail, which is an essential part
of the design, and could not have been brought from elsewhere and built
in. Such is the carving in the spandrils of doorways (Fig. 28), the
pendants of the hall roof, and the ceiling decoration of certain rooms.
This must all have been wrought on the spot, but it forms an extremely
small part of the whole. While the spandrils of three or four doorways
are carved with Renaissance detail, the doorways themselves are in
other respects quite Gothic. The hall roof, as already said, is Gothic
in conception, although much of its ornament is of the newer fashion.
The same may be said of the chapel roof, which is an imitation in oak
of some of the stone vaulting and pendants of the period. The ceilings
will be referred to later, but it may here be said that most of them
are derived from the wood-ribbed ceilings of Late Gothic work, and that
only in the small room called Wolsey's Closet does the design decidedly
follow Italian models. It will thus be seen that Hampton Court is
essentially Gothic in style, and that only in its susceptible places
has it been affected by the foreign fashion.
What happened at Hampton Court happened elsewhere, and in all the
examples which have come down to us the same thing is to be seen--a
Gothic structure with more or less of Italian ornament: more in such
places as Sutton Court and Layer Marney Tower, less at Compton Winyates
and Hengrave.
There was, however, one building, which has not come down to us,
in which the Italian manner must have been much more in evidence,
judging by such accounts as we have of the place. This was the palace
of Nonesuch, in Surrey. It was built by Henry VIII. as a retreat,
according to Paul Hentzner, the tutor of a young German nobleman who
visited England in 1598.[4] It was in "a very healthful situation,"
he says, "chosen by King Henry VIII. for his pleasure and retirement,
and built by him with an excess of magnificence and elegance, even to
ostentation; one would imagine that everything that architecture can
perform to have been employed in this one work; there are everywhere
so many statues that seem to breathe, so many miracles of consummate
art, so many casts that rival even the perfection of Roman antiquity,
that it may well claim and justify its name of Nonesuch." The site
was acquired by the king in 1538,[5] and as he died in 1547, he must
have begun to build almost immediately. According to a statement in
Braun's _Civitates_ (1582), he "procured many excellent artificers,
architects, sculptors, and statuaries, as well Italians, French, and
Dutch as natives, who all applied to the ornament of this mansion the
finest and most curious skill they possessed in these several arts,
embellishing it within and without with many magnificent statues, some
of which vividly represent the antiquities of Rome, and some surpass
them."[6] About eight years after Henry's death the house was alienated
from the Crown to the Earl of Arundel, and was thereby saved from the
destruction contemplated by Queen Mary, who found it too costly to
finish. The Earl, however, "for the love and honour he bare to his old
master," completed the building and left it to his son-in-law, Lord
Lumley, who added a second court. In 1591 it again came into possession
of the Crown, and so continued until it was presented by Charles II.
to his favourite, Barbara, Countess of Castlemaine, who pulled it down
to help towards paying her debts. A few years before this happened
Evelyn notes in his diary under date 3rd January, 1666: "I supp'd in
Nonesuch House, whither the office of the Exchequer was transferr'd
during the plague, at my good friend's Mr. Packer's, and tooke an exact
view of the plaster statues and bass relievos inserted 'twixt the
timbers and punchions of the outside walles of the Court; which must
needs have ben the work of some celebrated Italian. I much admir'd how
it had lasted so well and intire since the time of Hen. VIII., expos'd
as they are to the aire; and pitty it is they are not taken out and
preserv'd in some drie place; a gallerie would become them. There are
some mezzo-relievos as big as the life, the storie is of the Heathen
Gods, emblems, compartments, etc. The Palace consists of two courts,
of which the first is of stone, castle-like, by the Lo. Lumlies (of
whom 'twas purchas'd), the other of timber, a Gotic fabric, but these
walls incomparably beautified. I observ'd that the appearing timber
punchions, entrelices, &c., were all so cover'd with scales of slate,
that it seem'd carv'd in the wood and painted, the slate fastened
on the timber in pretty figures, that has, like a coate of armour,
preserv'd it from rotting." Some two and a half years before this visit
of Evelyn's, his lively contemporary, Mr. Pepys, had gone through the
park to the house and, as he says, "there viewed as much as we could
of the outside, and looked through the great gates, and found a noble
court." In September, 1665, he was again there, and while waiting about
he examined the house, which was, he says, "on the outside filled with
figures of stories, and good painting of Rubens' or Holben's doing. And
one great thing is, that most of the house is covered, I mean the post
and quarters in the walls, with lead, and gilded."
[4] _Hentzner's Travels_, ed. by Horace Walpole
[5] _Gentleman's Magazine_, August, 1837.
[6] _Archæologia_, Vol. XXXIX., p. 32. Toto del Nunziata was probably
one of the Italians.
Of all this beautiful work nothing has survived, except a painted panel
or two preserved at Loseley, in Surrey, and possibly other fragments in
other houses of the district. According to a statement of John Aubrey,
the antiquary, some of the materials of Nonesuch went to the building
of The Durdans near Epsom. Evelyn calls it a Gothic building, and we
shall probably not be far wrong in placing it in the same category
as other buildings of the time--English in conception, but adorned
with foreign ornament, which in this case was of greater extent and
better workmanship than that on any other contemporary house. It seems
clear, however, that the work, important as it was, did not have any
permanent effect upon English architecture. It was the culmination
of the Italian movement prevalent throughout Henry VIII.'s reign;
after his death, and before the newness of Nonesuch had worn off, the
Italian influence gave way to the Dutch. Nonesuch was a large building,
especially after Lord Lumley had added the second court; but it would
seem that Henry VIII. actually built but one court, measuring 116 feet
long by 137 feet wide.[7] Hampton Court had four large courts besides
half-a-dozen smaller ones; the largest or Base Court, measuring 167
feet by 142 feet, still remains; so also do the Clock Court, measuring
160 feet by 91 feet, and the Chapel Court; the fourth, measuring 116
feet by 108 feet, has given way to Wren's buildings. Hampton Court,
therefore, stood without a rival in point of size, but Nonesuch was
more magnificently decorated, and we can but echo Evelyn's lament
that the beautiful panels were "not taken out and preserv'd in
some drie place."
[7] _Archæologia_, Vol. V., p. 429.
[Illustration: 29.--LACOCK ABBEY, WILTSHIRE. TOWER AT SOUTH-EAST
CORNER (BETWEEN 1540 AND 1553).]
Just about the time that Nonesuch was being built, Lacock Abbey in
Wiltshire was being converted into a residence by William Sharington,
who had bought it on the dissolution of the monasteries. He was lord of
the manor in 1540, and he died in 1553,[8] so that all the work which
he did must be comprised between those dates. One important part of his
work is the octagonal tower at the south-east corner of the house (Fig.
29). The detail of the stonework is simple, and, except for certain
brackets, does not show much foreign influence, but in the tower are
two stone tables (Figs. 30 and 31), evidently made for their situation,
which strongly display the new spirit. That one of them was expressly
made for William Sharington is proved by his initials and crest being
part of its ornamentation; and as a skilful mason named Chapman was
working on the new buildings, it is just possible that he may have
carved one or both of these tables. It is the table on the middle floor
which has its base ornamented with Sharington's initials and crest;
from this base rises a central pillar, against which squat four figures
of satyrs carrying baskets of fruit and foliage upon which rests the
table-top. The satyrs have that curious resemblance about their heads
to North American Indians which characterises a number of such figures
carved during the latter half of the sixteenth century. The second
table (on the top floor) has nothing about it directly connecting it
with Sharington. It was evidently intended for a banqueting house,
as it is adorned with figures of Apicius, the first authority on the
pleasures of the table, Ceres, Bacchus, and an unnamed personage of the
same hierarchy.
[8] "Notes on Lacock Abbey," by C. H. Talbot, _Wilts. Archæolog. and
Nat. Hist. Mag._ Vol. XXVI.
[Illustration: 30.--LACOCK ABBEY, WILTSHIRE. STONE TABLE IN TOWER.]
Sharington's work is of considerable interest, and includes, in
addition to minor matters such as a chimney-piece, chimney-stacks, and
panelling, a fine range of stabling (Fig. 32), of which the detail
is tolerably simple, and of a character closely resembling that which
prevailed twenty years later, although here and there, in a chimney
or a bracket, we get a touch more in keeping with what is usually
associated with Sharington's own time. In addition to the Renaissance
work in the tables there is some tile paving (Plate IX.) which
displays, amid the foliage, the vases and the dolphins that form the
staple of Italian ornament, the initials of Sharington and his third
wife, Grace, his arms (gu., between two flaunches arg. and az., two
crosses formée, in pale), and his crest, a scorpion. As Sir William
Sharington died in 1553, and it was during the life of his third wife
that these tiles were made, they may fairly be dated about 1550.
[Illustration: 31.--LACOCK ABBEY, WILTSHIRE. STONE TABLE IN TOWER.]
[Illustration: PLATE IX.
LACOCK ABBEY, WILTSHIRE. TILE PAVING (ABOUT 1550).
SEPARATE TILES FROM THE SAME PAVEMENT.]
With the close of the first half of the century we come to the end
of pronounced Italian detail such as pervades the tiles at Lacock,
and characterises other isolated features in different parts of
the country. The nature of the detail in the second half of the
century is different; it no longer comprises the dainty cherubs, the
elegant balusters, vases and candelabra, the buoyant dolphins, and
delicately modelled foliage which are associated with Italian and
French Renaissance work, but it indulges freely in strap work, curled
and interlaced, in fruit and foliage, in cartouches, and in caryatides,
half human beings, half pedestals, such as were the delight of the
Dutchman of the time. But the extreme heaviness of the Dutch work was
lightened in its passage across the water, and the English workmen seem
to have improved upon their later models as much as they fell short
of their earlier. There is a fine carved and inlaid chest in St. Mary
Overie, Southwark, which shows this change in detail (Plate X.), but it
is treated with more restraint than the woodwork of later years. It was
the gift of Hugh Offley, and bears his initials and marks, as well as
his arms and those of his wife's family: he was Lord Mayor in 1556, and
is not unlikely to have given the chest in that year.
[Illustration: 32.--LACOCK ABBEY, WILTSHIRE. THE STABLES (BETWEEN 1540
AND 1553).]
In addition to the change in the character of the detail, we find a
classic rendering of strings and cornices more prevalent; doorways
became frequently round-headed instead of flat-pointed, windows became
square-headed, and all accessories parted with what remains of Gothic
character they may have possessed in favour of a classic treatment. But
the general body of a building was less susceptible of change than were
its particular features, and how the general body of such buildings as
houses developed will be seen in the next chapter.
[Illustration: 32A.--FROM THE SEDILIA, WYMONDHAM CHURCH, NORFOLK.]
[Illustration: PLATE X.
CHEST FROM ST. MARY OVERIE, SOUTHWARK (DATED 1556).]