same scenes, and are derived from the same source, as many of those carved on the tympana and fonts of Norman churches. Such sculptures are found on churches dating from 1135 to 1190, and almost no figure sculpture is found on churches of an earlier date. The subjects carved on the churches are similar to those on the crosses, such as Adam and Eve, David and the lion, Daniel and the lions, hunting scenes, animals, monsters, and symbolic figures derived from the bestiaries. (See Dalmeny below.) The latter figures continued to be used on Gothic structures till a comparatively late date.
|
Fig. 9a.—Island of Oronsay. |
Fig. 10.—Kilchoman Cross, Islay. |
The sculptured crosses of the East of Scotland thus naturally connect themselves with the current design of the period in other countries. They are no longer the mysterious and unintelligible monuments they
were once supposed to be. By the able investigations and expositions of the writers above referred to, they are brought into harmony with the general art of Europe prior to the twelfth century, and are shown to hold a prominent place in the artistic history of the country.
It is remarkable, notwithstanding the abundance of sculpture on the early monuments, that, until the advent of the Norman influence, scarcely any indication of architectural details or sculpture occurs on the churches of either Ireland or Scotland.
The earliest sign of decoration on buildings in Ireland is seen in the form of a cross, composed of five white pebbles, inserted over the doorway, in the dark stone of which the beehive cells of Ardoilean are built. Some of the round towers contain very early instances of symbolism in the Celtic cross carved on the lintel, while late examples (such as Brechin) show a further advance in the introduction of a Crucifixion on the lintel, and other figures on other parts of the doorway. The carving of the cross on the above and other lintels is probably symbolic of the blood of the lamb which was struck on the doorposts of the Israelites in Egypt at the Passover.[42]
EARLY ECCLESIASTICAL STRUCTURES IN SCOTLAND.
The ecclesiastical structures of the early centuries which still survive in Scotland are of the type of the stone erections above described in the monasteries of Ireland. The beehive huts and oratories of the parent eremitical establishments in the latter country are represented by a few similar collections of structures which yet remain in the remote islands and distant parts of Scotland.
Groups of dry-built beehive huts (or the remains of them), surrounding one or more primitive churches, can still be pointed to in several localities. These are surrounded with the wall or cashel which was always present around the Irish monasteries.
Diminutive dry-built stone cells or oratories, with sloping or curved walls, having the roof closed in with overlapping stones, converging towards the centre, and covered with flag-stones, are still found in the remote islands. One oratory also exists at Inchcolm where the stone roof is supported by a true arch, as in some of the latest Irish examples. It should, however, be pointed out that huts of similar construction to the above are known to have been erected and inhabited in recent times in the Outer Hebrides.[43] The hermitages above referred to, although belonging to this oldest type of structure, may thus possibly not be the oldest buildings in the country.
At a later time the rude monastic cells and hermitages were followed by the churches established by the missionaries from Iona. The Scottish churches erected by the Columbans were, like those of Ireland, of extreme simplicity, and generally of small dimensions. They consisted of a simple oblong chamber, with a single door and a single small window. The walls were often built without mortar, and the wall apertures were finished with undressed stones. These structures were sometimes covered with a plain barrel vault, and sometimes with rafters and thatch. The jambs of the doorway incline inwards and have straight lintels; the windows are either square-headed or rudely arched. Until the Romanesque influence is felt, not a trace of any kind of ornament is to be found on these churches. Latterly, a few details resembling Norman work are introduced.
In other examples of this type the details are more advanced. The door jambs are upright and are covered with semi-circular arches, and the windows are also similarly treated. The buildings, however, possess few features to enable the date of their erection to be determined. They may possibly have all been erected during a long course of years at different times in different localities, according to local circumstances; but it is natural to suppose that those of the more refined type are the latest.
Another class of churches forms a distinctly later type than the above simple quadrilateral structures. These are the churches consisting of a nave and chancel. Not that the method of construction or the details of these churches show any advance on the previous class. On the contrary, the details are in many cases as simple and rude as those of the one-chambered churches; but the alteration of the ground plan, by the addition of a separate chancel, shows a development of the religious service, leading to the inference that the type of churches with chancels is later than the single-chambered ones. This, however, only shows that the idea is later, not that single-chambered churches did not continue to be erected after the chancel had, in some instances, been introduced.[44] The persistence of an original form of plan is remarkable and is well exemplified in the history of the castles of Scotland, which shows how the primitive keep-plan of the thirteenth century continued to be adopted up to the seventeenth century, long after other and more developed forms of castles had been introduced.
The tendency in churches, however, seems to have been to adhere to the chancel plan after its introduction, and even to alter older simple churches by the addition of a chancel to one-chambered structures. Of this we have mentioned an instance in Ireland at St. Kevin’s oratory at Glendalough, and we shall meet with examples in Scotland as we proceed. In other instances, primitive oratories have been converted into churches with chancels by the addition of a nave, the original oratory being retained as the chancel. We have thus a transitional plan forming the link which connects these primitive single-chambered churches with the more advanced type of church with nave and chancel. In most of these early churches the chancel forms a separate apartment from the nave, the entrance to the chancel being by a doorway only, generally similar in size and form to that of the western entrance to the nave.
The chancel arch occurs, in some instances, as a later development. This, together with a few other details, seems to point to the influence of the Continental or Romanesque style which was slowly beginning to make itself felt in some parts of the country. All the above types of structures have been thoroughly examined and described by Mr. Muir, and will be more fully dealt with in the detailed descriptions of the churches derived from Mr. Muir’s works.
There still remain some special examples of Celtic structures to be mentioned. These are the well-known round towers, of which those at Abernethy and Brechin have already been referred to. A third round tower is also found attached to the church of Egilsay, in Orkney.[45] These towers are, undoubtedly, all examples of a style imported from Ireland. They are detached specimens of a group, of which no fewer than seventy-six examples still exist in that country, besides twenty-two others which are known to have existed formerly. It has been shown by Dr. Petrie that the Irish round towers were erected as places of refuge in connection with monasteries, to which the monks might repair with their relics and treasures in case of alarm. Such shelter was only too much required, as the valuables of the monastic institutions formed a very tempting bait for pillage by the Norsemen, whose depredations were so alarming during the ninth century.
The history of the round towers of Ireland is easily traced in their architecture, and has been fully explained and illustrated by Dr. Petrie in his well-known book on the subject, and in the late Lord Dunraven’s beautiful work on the early structures of Ireland. These towers are always found associated with religious sites. The earliest examples are comparatively rude in structure, while the later ones gradually improve in style of masonry and finish, until the latest are built with ashlar work, and contain some Romanesque ornaments and details. In all, however, the leading principles of their construction are the same. (Fig. 12.) The tower is round on plan, and is finished on top with a conical roof. The door is narrow, and is placed, for security, at a considerable height above the ground, and the lower floor is sometimes built up solid, so as to resist conflagration. The windows are small, except those on the top story, which are generally set facing the cardinal points, and are larger, so as to allow the sound of the bell to be heard—one of the uses of the tower being to serve as a belfry. The Irish practice of inclining the jambs of the doors is maintained, and in the early examples the lintel is straight, while in the later ones the door is finished with a semi-circular arch, and enriched with several orders of mouldings and ornaments bearing a markedly Norman character. This remark applies also to the four windows of the top story, which are plain in the early examples, and gradually become more ornamental and Norman like. The Irish towers are almost invariably built alone, and free from other structures; but some late examples are constructed in connection with churches, and enter from them by a door on the level of the floor of the church. The idea of using these towers as a place of security is thus departed from, and they are then simply of use as belfries.[46] Finally, they become absorbed into the structure of the church, and are erected merely to serve as belfries on the gable.
In the three Scottish round towers we find the same characteristics as in those of Ireland. The tower at Egilsay (q.v.) is rude in style of masonry, but as
it enters from the church on the level of the floor, it is evidently of the late type above referred to. The towers at Brechin and Abernethy (q.v.) are built with more carefully selected and wrought materials, and both have the door, which is built with inclined jambs, set some feet above the ground. The latter has the four upper windows covered with semi-circular arches, showing a considerable amount of Norman character in the mouldings and enrichments, as well as in the style of masonry. That at Brechin has a door with sloping jambs, having a Crucifixion carved above it and dragonesque sculptures at the base, and other details connecting it in a marked manner with the style of the round towers of Ireland. There can be no doubt that these are outlying examples of the Irish class of towers, while they exhibit also some features of the Romanesque architecture which, in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, had penetrated thus far northwards.
The next step in architectural progress consists of another structure, comprising a tower of a character somewhat related to the above, but having the Norman character more fully developed. This is the church of St. Regulus at St. Andrews (q.v.), the tower of which is lofty and square. This tower may be compared to the square tower of Cormac’s Chapel at Cashel, in Ireland, which is stated by Dr. Petrie, on good authority, to have been finished by 1135.[47] They both possess Norman features, well developed, and their square form and close attachment to a church are elements which distinguish them from the other and older round towers. Probably, however, they were also intended, like the latter, to form places of secure retreat as well as belfries. Both bear the signs of being late buildings of their class.
The dates of all the Irish round towers are somewhat uncertain, but probably extend from the ninth to the twelfth centuries, having, as already stated, been erected at the time of the invasions of the plundering Northmen. The dates of the destruction of several are recorded, and have been collected by Dr. Petrie, who also shows that many churches which had been destroyed by the Northmen were repaired and rebuilt about 1150.[48]
It is believed that in Ireland a form of Romanesque was introduced before the Anglo-Norman invasion,[49] and many of the early ornamented churches show a style of carving in which the Irish interlaced work and other special details are introduced. But in Scotland there are no traces of churches containing any similar work, although, possibly, some may have existed and been swept away in the great rebuilding epoch which followed the Norman Conquest.
The earliest examples of anything like ornament in Scottish churches within the historic period are undoubtedly the outcome of the Roman influence introduced under the Normans. We have already referred to the effects of early Roman influence at St. Regulus; and the next earliest building, the date of which is thought to be recorded, is the Reilig Oran at Iona (q.v.), a simple single-chambered structure, with a west doorway containing Norman ornament. This is said to have been erected by Queen Margaret before 1093.[50]
The chapel in Edinburgh Castle bearing St. Margaret’s name is also attributed to her, and is supposed to have been erected during her lifetime, or shortly afterwards. It would, in that case, be the first example in Scotland of a church terminating with an eastern apse (which, however, is square on the exterior).
Whether these buildings were actually erected in Queen Margaret’s lifetime or not, they certainly belong to a period not long subsequent. The life of that Queen and Saint marks the period of transition in Scotland from the old system to the new, not only in building, but in every other department.
Edgar Aetheling, the heir of the old Saxon kings, having been driven out by the Conqueror, found refuge, along with his mother and sisters, in the Court of his relative, Malcolm Canmore. There Margaret, having become Malcolm’s wife, soon introduced many of the reforms and ameliorations she had learned in England. Particularly, she gave a distinct impetus to the Roman influence, then very strong in the South, and encouraged the hosts of Saxon refugees who now crowded to Scotland, bringing their advanced notions with them. The same tendency was manifested by Margaret’s sons, Edgar and Alexander, who followed her footsteps in endeavouring to assimilate the Scottish Church to that of England.
It was King Alexander who, being driven by a storm on the Island of Inchcolm, in the Frith of Forth, was rescued and sustained by a hermit, who then occupied a primitive cell, built on the island, similar to those of the Columbans above referred to. The king vowed, in thankfulness for his deliverance, to found a monastery on the spot, and in 1123 he here introduced a colony of Canons Regular. He also endeavoured to bring the Episcopacy of St. Andrews into conformity with the Roman model.
Under Alexander,[51] Turgot, the Prior of Durham, and biographer of St. Margaret, was appointed to the long vacant See of St. Andrews. This king also founded the Bishopric of Moray, and restored that of Dunkeld. In the former wild Diocese the churches of Birnie, Spynie, and Kinedor appear to have existed, but it was not till 1203 that Bricius, the sixth bishop, was able to fix his cathedral at Spynie.
In 1115 Alexander introduced a colony of Canons Regular to Scone, from Nastley Abbey, in Yorkshire, and some years later he brought canons to the Diocese of Dunkeld, and in 1122 he founded a Priory of Canons Regular on an island at the east end of Loch Tay.[52]
Alexander was succeeded by his brother, David I., who carried out vigorously the same ecclesiastical policy. While still Prince of Cumbria, he, about 1115, appointed an inquisition of the elders and wise men of Cumbria to inquire into the lands and churches which formerly belonged to the See of Glasgow. The Prince appointed his tutor John to the revived bishopric, and in 1147 a dean and chapter, after the model of Sarum, were introduced. On his accession to the throne David proceeded diligently with the establishment of bishoprics and monasteries. It is said of him by Ailred of Rivaux[53] that, “Whereas he had found in the whole kingdom of Scotland three or four bishoprics only, what with ancient ones which he restored and new ones which he founded, he left nine at his death.” The bishoprics which existed at his accession were those of St. Andrews, Moray, and Dunkeld. Those he founded were the Dioceses of Rosemarkie, Ross, Aberdeen, and Caithness. Glasgow, as we have seen, he re-established, and the See of Galloway was also restored.
Under King David I. a final effort was made to suppress the Culdees, or rather to absorb them into the general system as approved by Rome. Those of St. Andrews were with difficulty dispossessed. The Culdees of Lochleven were suppressed. Those of Monymusk, in Aberdeenshire, were brought under the control of the Bishop of St. Andrews. Not only were the old establishments suppressed, but new monastic orders were everywhere introduced, Dunfermline Abbey was remodelled and Benedictines brought to it from Canterbury. The same order was introduced at Urquhart in Inverness-shire. After Moray had been brought into subjection, the Monastery of Kinloss was founded and peopled with Cistercians from Melrose. Of other monastic institutions throughout the country many others were re-established on a new footing and received the benefactions of the king. In 1113 he had (as Earl) founded a monastery at Selkirk for Benedictine Monks of the Order of Tyron. This was afterwards removed to Kelso, while the establishments of Melrose, Dundrennan, Newbattle, Coldingham, Holyrood, Cambuskenneth were fostered and strengthened.
The efforts of King David in the first half of the twelfth century carried out vigorously in Scotland the system inaugurated by St. Margaret, which was, indeed, the distinguishing feature of the period throughout Europe. He, no doubt, had policy as well as religion in view, and believed that in importing numerous bands of educated monks into the border lands of his kingdom, both in the North and South, he was doing the best possible to spread the benefits of education and civilisation in those unsettled localities, and was thus consolidating his dominion.
At this period the Saxon refugees were followed into Scotland by large numbers of Norman knights. These were well received by King David and presented with lands in the outlying districts, which he had subdued, as well as throughout the country. The number and extensive possessions of these Norman immigrants are most apparent in the names of the proprietors settled in every part of the country.[54]
The policy of colonising the outlying and turbulent districts with these trained knights is apparent. They would in self-defence help to keep the country in order, and defend it from the attacks of the still unsubdued regions of the North and West. It also had the effect of facilitating the spread of the Roman ecclesiastical system which the king had so much at heart. The country, being parcelled out in the hands of Anglo-Normans already imbued with the principles and practices of that system, would soon be brought into conformity with it. Each proprietor would, as soon as possible, raise a hamlet round his castle for his retainers, and a village church for their religious requirements. Thus there speedily arose, instead of the ancient tribal arrangements, a new distribution of the land into parishes, each with its parochial church and priest, and each tithed to its own manor.
Evidences of these early parish churches still survive in many places, and they will be illustrated in the sequel.
But “this goodly framework of a parochial secular establishment was shipwrecked when scarcely formed.”[55] Monachism was then in the ascendant in Europe. New Orders were constantly being created, to spread the banner of Roman supremacy. Their monasteries soon drew to themselves all that was worth having in the Church. The Lords encouraged them and presented them with lands and churches, and the people were attracted by their zeal and asceticism. They soon became rich and were able to indulge their taste in the erection of noble monasteries and churches, the illustration of which, erected during the three succeeding centuries, forms a most important part of the following pages.
Having traced the course of the influences which affected the primitive ecclesiastical structures of Scotland till the period when the Irish influence was superseded by that of Rome, it is now proposed to glance shortly at the origin and development of the Norman style which, as we have seen, was introduced into this country in the twelfth century, and of the various styles of Gothic architecture which succeeded it.
ROMANESQUE ARCHITECTURE.
After the fall of the Roman empire in the fifth century, a debased style founded on Roman models prevailed over Western Europe, and
as the various waves of barbarians swept over the empire and settled in different parts of it, they adopted the Roman system of construction which they found in existence, and imported into it gradually ideas of their own. In course of time a method of building was thus developed which is known as the Romanesque style. This style varied greatly in different localities, according as it was influenced by the presence or absence of Roman structures to serve as models for imitation; but over the whole empire it retained a certain amount of resemblance to Roman forms.
The Roman principle of an arched, as distinguished from a trabeated, style of building was preserved everywhere, but was for long applied in a very simple and merely imitative manner. When, however, nationalities came to be settled, and law established, and when at the same time the regulating and disciplining influence of the Church made itself felt, some elements
of order and regularity were introduced into the system of construction. The large and massive building materials employed by the Romans not being usually available by the builders of the Middle Ages, smaller materials had to be utilised, and this led to the introduction of new ideas in their application. For instance, the arches supporting walls were, under the Romans, constructed with large materials, and had a broad soffit or under surface going through the wall (Fig. 13); but with the smaller materials in use in the tenth and eleventh centuries, arches, for the same purpose, were more conveniently built in rings, one within the other (Fig. 14). These rings were placed so as to present to the eye, instead of a flat soffit, a series of arches arranged in stages or steps towards the centre, and each bearing a part of the load of the wall. This subdivision of the original plain soffit is called the “subordination” of arches, and was the first step in the long process of advance which led finally to the perfect Gothic architecture of the Middle Ages.
The next step was to divide the solid square piers which had been originally employed to support the arches into a number of distinct parts corresponding to the rings of the arches, thus forming “orders” in the piers, as well as in the arches they carried. (See Fig. 14.)
Owing to the occurrence of frequent fires in the wooden roofs of early churches, the builders aimed at carrying out the Roman practice of fireproof vaulting. This was at first done timidly and with many failures. The round barrel vault of the Romans was that generally employed; but in Provence the pointed barrel vault (Fig. 15) was adopted from an early period, being a form which exerted on the side walls a less horizontal thrust than the semi-circular arch, and was the best shape for supporting a stone roof laid upon it. In order to strengthen this vault, a projecting ring or inner arch was constructed under the main vault, and extended across the nave between each pair of the main piers.
Carrying out the principle of subordination already introduced, each of these strengthening rings had a shaft with cap and base placed so as to receive it, thus indicating to the eye the principle on which it acted—viz., that of carrying the weight of the strengthening rib down to the foundation.
By the eleventh century the principle of subordination had been carried out into every part of the structure, and some refinement was beginning to be attempted; shafts were substituted for the plain orders of the piers, and a cap and base provided for each (see Fig. 14.), and the sharp angles of the orders of the arch were softened by having large roll mouldings wrought upon them. The next step in the progress of development was the subdividing or groining of the vault, so as to admit of windows for the purpose of lighting the upper part of the building, which, with the barrel vault, was found to be very dark. (Fig. 16). Many different plans were tried to improve the lighting of the vault, but without satisfactory result, till recourse was had to the intersecting vault of the Romans, still visible in many structures then surviving. This mode of vaulting consisted in the introduction of a vault crossing the structure between each set of piers at right angles to the main vault, and it had at once the desired effect, as it enabled the side walls containing windows to be carried up as high as the top of the vault, thus giving ample light. Other very important consequences followed from this improvement of the vaulting. Hitherto, with the barrel vault, the pressure had been uniform over the side walls, which were made very solid to resist it; but with the introduction of the groined vaulting, the weight of the vault was concentrated on the points where the groins rested. This necessitated the strengthening of these points, which was managed by means of buttresses. These are simply portions of wall set at right angles to the building in order to receive the weight and thrust of the arches and carry them down to the ground. The portion of the side wall between the buttresses was thus relieved from any pressure beyond its own weight. It is evident that an entire change in the principles of the construction of the edifice would thus be created. The buttresses now became important members both in the construction and the appearance of the building. The side walls, being now mere enclosing screens, might be reduced from their previous massive condition, and made as thin and light as desired, while the windows in them might be enlarged to any extent. The same remarks apply to the side aisles, the vaulting of which was also groined and supported on buttressed points like the main vaults. With the solid materials of the Romans, the groins or lines of meeting of the intersecting arches formed simple curved lines or angles; but with the smaller materials of the mediæval architects this construction could not easily be accomplished, and it became usual to construct the groins with a solid stone rib, at first plain, but in later examples enriched with a roll moulding.
The development of mediæval architecture reached the point above described during the course of the twelfth century. The Romanesque architecture of Lombardy, Germany, and Burgundy had wrought out the arrangement of the groined vaulting and the distribution of the forces arising therefrom, and the designing and construction of the necessary buttresses. The subordination of the various members, the division of the piers and arches into orders, each performing a distinct function, the erection of a vaulting shaft at each pier to receive the ribs of the vaults, the construction of ribs to form the groins and carry the panels of the vaults, had all been fully accomplished. Each shaft was supported on a base and crowned with a cap to receive its load, and each order of the arches received an appropriate moulding or enrichment. Thus far were the constructional features of a genuine arched style of construction, in stone, wrought out during the course of the eleventh and early part of the twelfth centuries.
The forms of the ornament kept pace with the development of the construction. In the earlier centuries the Romanesque style had become stereotyped, the general features being regarded as wrought out, and invention limited itself to the elaboration of details and ornaments. Hence it arose that much of the Romanesque ornament was overloaded and inapplicable to its position. But as advances were made in the direction of improving the vaulting and other constructional elements, the builders’ energies were also directed towards improvement of the decorative features, the heavy unsuitable ornaments were discarded, and lighter and more appropriate forms introduced.
This new phase of architecture was adopted by the Normans with their usual energy, and during the twelfth century was carried out by them, both in Normandy and England, to an advanced state of development, thus constituting the well-known Norman style.
NORMAN STYLE.
This style is easily recognised by its simple and massive forms and its semi-circular arches. The exterior (Fig. 17) is generally plain, with broad and slightly projecting buttresses attached to the building, and sometimes
crowned with pinnacles. The doorways are, however, generally treated in a more ornamental manner. They are often deeply recessed, and have the jambs decorated with a series of round shafts set in square nooks or recesses, and furnished with richly-carved caps and bases. The arch
mouldings, which are also numerous, are arranged in square steps or orders, and frequently ornamented with much carving of special kinds of enrichments. Of these the chevron, or zig-zag, is most abundantly used, together with the billet, the bird’s head, &c. The windows are wide in proportion to their height, and are covered in with round arches.
In the interior (Fig. 18) the Norman piers consist of simple cylindrical columns of great size, frequently carved with large zig-zags or spiral lines carried round them, and finished with bold caps and bases. The most frequent caps are of the “cushion” form, which resembles one or more spherical figures having portions cut off perpendicularly. The caps are also sometimes carved with human or other figures. The abacus is always solid, and generally square in shape. In some examples, especially in France, the capitals of the piers are frequently carved in rude imitation of the Corinthian form and foliage.
Late examples show the piers subdivided into the clustered form, which became universal in the subsequent periods. In the transition from Norman to Early Pointed, many of the features of the latter style are gradually introduced. Hence a mixture of the round and pointed arch, and a lightening of the mouldings, and a new kind of carving of foliage are observable in the latter half of the twelfth century. The earlier Norman edifices are extremely plain, scarcely any ornament being used. The figure sculpture is almost entirely confined to the period after 1135.
NORMAN STYLE IN SCOTLAND.
Of the cathedrals, monasteries, and churches erected in Scotland during the twelfth century, only a few portions now exist, nearly all of them having been reconstructed or altered at later times.
The Cathedral of Dunblane still retains a tower of the foundation of King David; and in the nave of the Cathedral of Kirkwall, commenced 1136, we yet possess a noble Norman structure, which, however, we owe to the piety of the Norwegian occupants of the Orkneys.
Of the monastic foundations of St. Margaret and her sons we still retain the venerable Norman nave of Dunfermline, and portions of the Norman edifices of Holyrood, Dryburgh, and Jedburgh.
Kelso Abbey Church, although only a fragment, is a fine specimen of the late style of the twelfth century. Arbroath Abbey, founded by William the Lion in 1178, still shows in its ruins some late work of the same period. Holyrood, Jedburgh, and St. Andrews contain much work of the period of transition from the Norman to the First Pointed style, which came into use about the beginning of the thirteenth century.
Of the twelfth century parish churches, those of Dalmeny and Leuchars are nearly complete and very beautiful examples, the former having nave, choir, and apse, and both exhibit much of the arcaded and ornamental work of the more florid period of the style. Portions of Norman work are found, as was to be expected in this great church-building epoch, in every county, and are represented here by a tower, there by a chancel arch, elsewhere by a door or a window, or other fragmentary relic—rarely by a whole nave or chancel. In some examples the Norman plan is still complete so far as the outline of the walls is concerned, but these are generally considerably altered and interfered with, as, for example, at Duddingston, Stobo, and Uphall. The parish churches were usually of small size, and consisted of an oblong nave and chancel, separated by a chancel arch generally ornamented with chevron enrichments. Frequently there was a semi-circular apse beyond the chancel, also entered by an enriched semi-circular arch. Side aisles were rarely introduced. The only Norman parish church of cruciform plan was that of St. Nicholas, Aberdeen, now greatly altered.
FIRST POINTED STYLE.
The Norman style of architecture continued to prevail in England till near the close of the twelfth century, and in Scotland for some time thereafter. At that period a further and completer development awaited the architecture of the Middle Ages. We have seen that the “subordination” of all the parts had been achieved, together with the use of the groined vault, with its accompanying buttresses and pinnacles, in the round arched style. The employment of the round arch was, however, found to involve many practical difficulties in connection with the vaulting. The bays of the nave, so long as they were square in plan, could be conveniently vaulted with intersecting semi-circular groins; but when they were of an oblong form, the width being greater than the length (as was often found necessary in order to suit the vaulting of the side aisles), the round arch was found very inconvenient in consequence of the large arch which spanned the nave rising to a greater height than the smaller arch of the side walls. It was endeavoured to overcome this difficulty by stilting the arch of the side vault so as to make its apex of the same height as the main transverse vault; but this scheme interfered with the lines of the groins or intersection of the vaults in such a manner as to render it unworkable. It therefore became necessary to seek for a more flexible form of arch, which would enable the apex of all the arches of the vaults, whatever their span, to rise to any required height. This useful form was discovered in the pointed arch, which had long been in use in Provence, and which the builders of the North of France now found themselves forced to adopt by the exigencies of their vaults, and which ultimately led to the development of the pointed style.
The new life and growth of architecture which, as we have seen, sprung into existence in the twelfth century, had been adopted with eagerness by the builders of the Royal Domain of France. Not being trammelled by the traditions of an ancient and long-used system, these architects had thrown themselves with energy into the new development of architecture, and it was in this locality that the application of the pointed arch to the difficulties of the vaulting seems to have been first successfully carried out.
As early as 1144 the pointed vaulting of the side chapels of the Cathedral of St. Denis was completed by the Abbé Suger. Some time elapsed until the effect of this new system of vaulting was fully realised, either in France or England; but when its advantages were at last seized, the pointed arch was speedily adopted. At first it was applied in both countries, for the sake of strength, to the main bearing arches; but gradually the round arch was superseded, and the pointed form adopted, for the sake of harmony, in all wall openings. The pointed style thus became completed in its main elements towards the close of the twelfth century. The pointed form of the vaulting gradually ruled every other feature. The large windows of the clerestory, being near the vaults, naturally assumed the same pointed form as the wall ribs, and the other windows and the doorways speedily followed, in sympathy with the general movement.
The fresh vigour of the mouldings and foliage begun under the Normans went on improving in the pointed style, and the energy and devotion of the builders in France and England wrought out in each country a separate pointed architecture, each founded on the use of the pointed arch, but each showing original and distinct elements.
In France there is visible, in the early pointed architecture, a constant effort to attain to some new development—a restless striving after novel and more expanded forms, leading to great magnitude and height in the churches, many of which were, in consequence, never finished. In England, while novelties of design are sought after, there is more contentment and completeness in the architecture. There is not the same soaring ambition and striving after spacious buildings and lofty vaults; consequently, the English cathedrals and large churches are more frequently finished, a greater amount of attention being devoted to rendering the structure complete and varied in its different parts than in the production of one great and striking result. The English cathedrals are thus more picturesque, while those of France are grander in appearance. The former effect is produced by the multiplicity and variety, as well as the completeness, of all the parts, many of the English cathedrals (as Salisbury, Fig. 19.) having double transepts, eastern lady chapels, large vaulted cloisters, detached chapter-houses, &c.; while the grand effect of the French cathedrals arises from their great size and height, and the apparent unity and simplicity of the design. In one respect the cathedrals and churches of the two countries greatly differ. Owing to
their immense height, the French churches require a vast quantity of lofty buttresses and pinnacles, which, to the eye accustomed to those of England, produce a feeling of confusion and unrest. The great flying