{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_30290/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_30290","id":"gutenberg_30290","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/30290","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Architecture","Category: Art","Category: History - British","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Church architecture -- Great Britain"],"text":"Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this\n      file which includes the numerous original illustrations.\n      See 30290-h.htm or 30290-h.zip:\n      (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/30290/pg30290-images.html)\n      or\n      (https://www.gutenberg.org/files/30290/30290-h.zip)\n\n\n\n\n\n_The Homeland Handbooks_--No. 55.\n\nOUR HOMELAND CHURCHES AND HOW TO STUDY THEM.\n\nby\n\nSIDNEY HEATH\n(Author of \"Some Dorset Manor Houses,\" etc.)\n\nIllustrated by the Author and Ethel M. Heath\n\nAnd by Photographs.\n\nPublished under the General Editorship\nof Prescott Row and Arthur Henry Anderson,\nby the Homeland Association for the\nEncouragement of Touring in Great Britain.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n [Illustration: The Foundations of a Romano-British Church.\n  Uncovered at Silchester. _Photograph S. Victor White & Co._]\n\n\n\nLondon:\nThe Homeland Association Ltd.,\n22, Bride Lane, Fleet Street, E.C.\n\nFirst Edition.\n1907.\n\n\n\n\nEDITORIAL NOTE.\n\n\nWith a view to making future Editions of this Handbook as accurate and\ncomprehensive as possible, suggestions for its improvement are cordially\ninvited. If sent to THE EDITORS, The Homeland Association, Association\nHouse, 22, Bride Lane, Fleet Street, E.C., they will be gratefully\nacknowledged.\n\n\nCOPYRIGHT.\n\nThis Book as a whole, with its contents, both Literary and Pictorial, is\nCopyrighted in Great Britain.\n\n\nADVERTISING.\n\nLOCAL.--Terms for Advertising in future issues of this Handbook\n    will be forwarded on application to the General Manager of the\n    Homeland Association, at the above address.\n\nGENERAL.--Contracts for the insertion of Advertisements through\n    the whole series of Homeland Handbooks, more than fifty volumes,\n    circulating through the country, can be arranged on application to\n    the General Manager.\n\n\n\n\n _CONTENTS._\n\n\n _Author's Preface_                                7\n _Dedication_                                      8\n _Introduction_                                    9\n\n    _I.--Early British Churches_                  19\n   _II.--Early Church Architecture_               26\n  _III.--The Saxon and Norman Styles_             31\n   _IV.--The Early English Style_                 47\n    _V.--The Decorated Style_                     57\n   _VI.--The Perpendicular Style_                 64\n  _VII.--The Renaissance and Later_               74\n _VIII.--Church Furniture and Ornaments_          80\n   _IX.--Bells and Belfries_                      95\n    _X.--The Spire: Its Origin and Development_   99\n   _XI.--Stained Glass_                          104\n  _XII.--Crypts_                                 109\n _XIII.--How to describe an Old Church_          111\n\n _Appendix--A Glossary of the Principal Terms\n  used in Ecclesiastical Architecture_           115\n _Bibliography_                                  123\n _Index_                                         124\n\n\n\n\n_LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS._\n\nPLATES.\n\n 1 _Foundations of a Romano-British Church_               _Frontispiece_\n 2 _The Church of St. Margaret, Lynn_                                52\n 3 _A Fine Perpendicular Tower, St. Mary, Taunton_                   72\n 4 _Sedilia and Chantry, Luton_                                      88\n       *       *       *       *       *\n   _The Various Forms of Arches_                                     10\n   _Plan of a Typical Gothic Cruciform Parish Church, Luton_         12\n   _Examples of Gothic Windows_                                      15\n   _Examples of Buttresses_                                          17\n   _A Rood Screen, with a Restoration of the Rood_                   20\n   _The Church of S. Martin, Canterbury_                             22\n   _Window Built with Roman Brick, Swanscombe_                       24\n   _A Reputed Saxon Doorway, Bishopstone_                            30\n   _Tower of Earls' Barton Church_                                   33\n   _An Example of Norman Tower, Bishopstone_                         34\n   _A Norman Pier Arcade, Abbots Langley_                            36\n   _Examples of Norman Mouldings_                                    37\n   _A Late Norman Parish Church, Castle Rising_                      38\n   _West Doorway, Rochester Cathedral_                               40\n   _Tympanum of Norman Doorway, Fordington St. George_               41\n   _Examples of Norman Capitals_                                     42\n   _A Curious Norman Capital, Seaford_                               43\n   _Norman and Early English Doorways, Dunstable Priory Church_      45\n   _Windows, Showing the Origin of Tracery_                          47\n   _An Early English Arch, Rochester Cathedral_                      48\n   _Wall Arcading, Showing Junction of Norman and Early English\n      Masonry, Dunstable Priory Church_                              50\n   _An Early English Doorway, Huntingdon_                            51\n   _A Group of Thirteenth Century Lancet Windows, Ockham_            53\n   _Salisbury Cathedral_                                             55\n   _Examples of Early English Capitals and Ornament_                 56\n   _A Late Decorated Window in a Parish Church, East Sutton_         59\n   _Examples of Decorated Ornament_                                  61\n   _Examples of Perpendicular Ornament_                              64\n   _Early Perpendicular Parish Church, Yeovil_                       65\n   _A Fine Parish Church, Showing Rich Perpendicular Work,\n      Terrington St. Clement, Norfolk_                               67\n   _A Perpendicular Doorway, Merton College_                         68\n   _A Perpendicular Porch, King's Lynn_                              71\n   _An English Renaissance Church, S. Stephen, Walbrook_             78\n   _A Typical Cornish Font_                                          80\n   _The Sanctuary Knocker, Durham Cathedral_                         82\n   _The Baptistery in Luton Church_                                  83\n   _An Example of a Leaden Font of the Late Norman Period_           85\n   _A Reputed Saxon Font, Shaldon_                                   86\n   _A Detached Holy-Water Stoup of Unusual Design_                   87\n   _A Typical Somerset Bench-End, Spaxton_                           89\n   _A Richly-Carved Pulpit and Canopy, Edlesborough_                 91\n   _Screen with Rood Loft, Kenton_                                   93\n   _The Carved Oak Balustrade in Compton Church_                     94\n   _Bell Turret for Three Bells, Radipole_                           98\n   _The Best Example of a Saxon Spire or Pyramidal Roof, Sompting_  100\n   _Leighton Buzzard Church, with Early English Tower and Spire_    102\n   _A Parish Church with a Shingle Broach Spire, Edenbridge_        105\n   _Interior Elevation of a Bay of a Church_                        114\n\n\n\n\n_STYLES OF ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE._\n\n\nThe following periods of architectural style may be of use for the\npurpose of reference, but it must be borne in mind that they are more or\nless approximate, as each style merged by slow degrees into the next.\n\n\n _Norman._--William I. to Stephen. 1066-1154.\n _Transition Norman._--Henry II. 1154-1189.\n _Early English Gothic._--Richard I. to Henry III. 1189-1272\n _Decorated._--Edward I., II., III. 1272-1377.\n _Perpendicular._--Richard II. to Henry VII. 1377-1485.\n _Tudor._--Henry VIII. to Elizabeth. 1485-1600.\n\n\nMr. Edmund Sharpe gives seven periods of English architecture up to the\ntime of the Reformation, and dates them as follows:--\n\n\n _ROMANESQUE._\n\n   I. _Saxon_              from ---- to 1066\n  II. _Norman_               \"  1066  \" 1145       79 years\n III. _Transitional_         \"  1145  \" 1190       45   \"\n\n\n _GOTHIC._\n\n  IV. _Lancet_             from 1190 to 1245       55 years\n   V. _Geometrical_          \"  1245  \" 1315       70   \"\n  VI. _Curvilinear_          \"  1315  \" 1360       45   \"\n VII. _Rectilinear_          \"  1360  \" 1550      190   \"\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nIt is a truism that the history of building is the history of the\ncivilized world, for of all the arts practised by man, there is none\nwhich conveys to us a clearer conception of the religion, history,\nmanners, customs, ideals and follies of past ages, than the art of\nbuilding. This applies in a special sense to cathedrals and churches,\nwhich glorious relics reflect and perpetuate the noble aim, the delicate\nthought, the refined and exquisite taste, the patient and painstaking\ntoil which have been expended upon them by the devout and earnest\ncraftsmen of the past.\n\nThere are very few of our ancient churches in village, town or city\nwhich do not offer some feature of interest to the visitor, and in the\nabsence of anything more important, there is sure to be some door,\nwindow, font, screen, or other detail which will amply repay him for the\nsmall amount of time spent in seeing it.\n\nThe aim of the author of this little volume has been to indicate the\nsymbolism and meaning attaching to the various portions of our churches\nand cathedrals, and to endeavour briefly to describe, in language as\nsimple as the subject will allow, the various styles of ecclesiastical\narchitecture with their distinctive characteristics in such a way as\nwill enable the reader to assign each portion and detail of a church to\nits respective period with an approximate degree of accuracy.\n\nHe does not claim to be original, but endeavours to be useful and\ninteresting. The best authorities have been consulted and freely drawn\nupon, but with the object in view of writing a book at once thus useful\nand interesting, no attempt has been made to deal with the subject in a\nstrictly architectural, or a purely scientific manner.\n\nWeymouth, 1906.\n\n\n\n\nDEDICATION.\n\n\nTo all those who love old buildings--cathedrals, abbeys, and village\nchurches, which breathe the spirit of an age with which we have entirely\nbroken--and who would fain hand down to posterity, unmutilated, the\ngreat building achievements of our forefathers, which we, with all our\nscience, wealth, and means of curtailing labour, can no more imitate\nthan we can reproduce the language of a Chaucer or a Shakespeare; this\nbook is respectfully dedicated.\n\nS. H.\n\n\n  \"_Firm was their faith, the ancient bands,\n    The wise of heart in wood and stone,\n  Who reared with stern and trusting hands\n    Those dark grey towers of days unknown;\n  They filled the aisles with many a thought,\n    They bade each nook some truth recall\n  The pillared arch its legend brought,\n    A doctrine came with roof and wall._\"\n                          --HAWKER OF MORWENSTOW.\n\n\n\n\nOUR HOMELAND CHURCHES AND HOW TO STUDY THEM.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\n\nHowever much we may admire, considered purely as art, the Pagan temples\nof the Greeks and Romans, we must confess that they are lacking in those\nhigh ideals and those sustained and inspired motives which seem to\npenetrate and permeate the buildings and churches of the Christian era.\nPerfect as is Greek art within its somewhat narrow limits, it is,\nnevertheless, cold, precise and lifeless. The Gothic buildings on the\ncontrary are pregnant with the very spirit of life.\n\nPrompted by a deep and fervent faith in their religion, the Gothic\nbuilders and sculptors unconsciously wove into the humblest of their\narchitectural enrichments some portion of their daily life and\npersonality. The slave-built temples of the Greeks offered no scope for\nthe exercise of individual expression--such, in fact, would have been\nstrongly resented--whereas the early Christian craftsman, revelling in\nhis freedom, seized every opportunity of expressing in his work his joy,\nfear and hope of immortality.\n\nThis is made apparent in the study of an old church, whereof every\nportion--door, window, bench-end, carving, gargoyle--has hidden about it\nsome suggestion of beautiful thought, or some distinct and appropriate\nsymbolism. The fact that symbolism underlies almost every such\nindication of medi\u00e6val thought is made abundantly manifest in the study\nof medi\u00e6val literature. Open any 12th century treatise on morals,\nscience or history, and you become aware of the fact at once. The\nmain-spring of this symbolism, of all Christian symbolism, turns on the\nparabolic meaning in the scheme of Creation. The early writers were far\nless concerned with recording the plain objective facts of history, than\nin pursuing the allegory and the love of the marvellous, and showing\nall those characteristics of what we now term an unscientific attitude\nof mind.\n\n [Illustration: The Various Forms of Arches.\n\n  Norman.          Stilted.        Horse Shoe.\n  Equilateral.     Lancet.         Drop.\n  Trefoil.         Trefoil.        Cinquefoil.\n  Ogee.            Four Centered.  Tudor.]\n\nIn its widest sense, symbolism means the expression of belief, and if we\nwould interpret history aright, we must grasp the fact that the key to\nthe character and disposition of peoples of all ages lies in the\nknowledge of their beliefs; for out of the beliefs of one age most\nsurely grow the beliefs of its successors, and in no work of man's hand\nare the beliefs held by various peoples in past ages more clearly\ndefined than in our cathedrals and churches, which noble buildings in\nevery civilized country indicate principles as well as facts, influences\nas well as results; and while presenting the finest materials for\n\u00e6sthetic study, are no less useful as indicating the psychological\npeculiarities of those builders of old to whose condition they bear\nwitness.\n\nIn our grand specimens of ecclesiastical architecture, we may read the\nworld's later history, and to-day they breathe the sombre reverential\ninfluence of a faith which sought to satisfy itself with the visible\nsymbolizing of those half-poetical, half-superstitious conceptions with\nwhich the religion of the Middle Ages was so deeply imbued.\n\nAn early development of decorative symbolic art, known as Celtic, of\nwhich we have examples on old Irish crosses, and particularly on\nilluminated MSS. was wrought by the Christian monks of the 7th and 8th\ncenturies, but what is generally understood as Christian symbolic art\nhad its finest development about the 13th century. Gothic art is\nessentially symbolic and in many instances, its individual forms have\nspecific significance. Thus the common equilateral triangle was used to\nsymbolize the Holy Trinity, as are the two entwined triangles. Other\nsymbols employed at this period setting forth the mystery of the Unity\nof the Trinity, without beginning and without end, are three interlaced\ncircles, and a very curious one is that in which three faces are so\ncombined as to form an ornamental figure. Baptism under the immediate\nsanction of the Divine Trinity was represented by three fishes placed\ntogether in the form of a triangle. So numerous, indeed were such\nChristian symbols after the 9th century that a mere enumeration of them\nwould occupy considerable space. Every trefoil symbolized the Holy\nTrinity; every quatrefoil the four Evangelists; every cross the\nCrucifixion, or the martyrdom of some saint; and in Gothic ornament and\ndecoration, we find the Chalice, the Crown of Thorns, the Dice, the Sop,\nthe Hammer and Nails, the Flagellum and other symbols of our Lord's\nPassion.\n\n [Illustration: Plan of a Typical Gothic Cruciform Parish Church.\n (St. Mary, Luton, fully described in No. 47 of this Series).\n  _Drawn by Ed. Craven Lee._]\n\nAlthough presenting the same characteristics in their external design,\nour town and village churches are very various. The simplest form, and\nthe one most commonly found, is that of a nave and chancel, with a tower\nat the west end; to which plan may be added aisles and transepts, the\nlatter often being wrongly called \"cross-aisles.\" When the walls of the\nnave above the arcade rise above those of the aisles and are pierced\nwith windows, the upper portion is called the clerestory, the meaning\nof which word is not free from obscurity; it seems probable that it\nindicates the clear story--the story which rises clear of the nave and\naisles. In large buildings, they are important both for utility and\nbeauty, but in small and early churches, they are of less importance.\n\nIt is a well-known fact that the chancel and nave of a church generally\nstand east and west. This arrangement, called the orientation, is\nsymbolic of the teaching that to the east we are to look for assistance\nand protection against the power of our enemy, and that as we pray we\nmay look for the day-spring, symbolized to us in the rising sun that\nsheds light and warmth all over the earth.\n\nThe public entrance to a church is generally at the west end (the priest\nusually had a door in the chancel for his own use). Through this door we\nenter the house of prayer, for as in the east we see the emblem of the\nLord of Life and Light, so the west represents the seat of darkness and\nof the powers of evil.\n\nThe earliest porches were those of the early Christian basilica churches;\nthey were long and arcaded and were called \"narthex.\" In later times,\nthey assumed two forms, one the projecting erection, covering the\nentrance and divided into three or more doorways, and the other a kind\nof covered chamber open at the end and having small windows at the\nsides. These latter are generally found on the north and south sides\nof the nave. Formerly, when church government was more rigorous in\ndiscipline than is now the case, the porch was the appointed place for\nthose who were under censure. Those also who were unbaptised, or who had\nnot yet received the sacrament of regeneration, were not allowed beyond\nthe porch, not quite excluded from the church and yet not permitted\nto enter fully. The porch also served as a path of admission for all\nChristians into the body of the church, so that they passed through the\nassembly of penitents and catechumens, who were wont to ask the prayers\nof the more highly privileged for their full restoration or admission to\nthe communion of the faithful.\n\nWith reference to our Lord's word, \"I am the Door,\" we frequently find\nthe tympana of church doors, particularly those of Norman date, adorned\nwith representations of events from his life, but they often also depict\nthe monsters, dragons and devils, that formed so strong an article in\nthe faith of the early Christians.\n\nA more detailed account of these tympana will be found in a following\nchapter.\n\nPassing through the porch we enter the nave, which word is derived from\nthe Latin _navis_, a ship. Its symbolic teaching is that of the Church\nriding triumphantly and buoyantly on the troubled and dark waters of the\nworld. The first thing noticed on entering the nave is the font, which\nwas formerly placed outside the church, in a separate building called\nthe baptistery; a few of our churches have retained these little\nbuildings which now form part of the churches proper.\n\nThe reason in early days for placing the font outside the church was\nthat the Christian was not admitted into the nave until he had been\nbaptised and confirmed, the latter rite being administered immediately\nafter baptism.\n\nFrom the western door there is a clear passage through the centre of\nthe nave, called the aisle, signifying the straight and narrow way from\nthe seat of darkness to immortal life. On each side of this aisle are\nseats for the laity, with room for standing and kneeling. The nave was\nusually divided from the chancel by an open screen of wood or stone,\nsignifying that although the Christian might have some insight into the\nmysteries of the priest's office, at the same time these were to be\npartly concealed from his view. The rood screen was so called from the\nfact that the great Rood, or Crucifix, stood above it, not always on the\nscreen itself, but on a separate beam, to which was often attached a\nrood loft or chamber. In early days, the lessons were read from the top\nof the rood screen, and in many of our churches the stairways leading\nthither have been retained.\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Gothic Windows.\n  Early English.  Decorated.  Perpendicular.\n  See also page 59.]\n\nIn churches where the screen has vanished, the division of the nave\nfrom the rest of the church is plainly marked by the chancel arch.\nThe chancel is emblematic of the Christian perfection, of the Church\ntriumphant in heaven.\n\nIn an old church, a piscina is nearly always found in the chancel, and\nhere, too, were the sedilia or seats for the officiating clergy, the\nprior, sub-prior, and the deacon, the last-named occupying the lowest\nseat.\n\nFounders' tombs also nearly always occupy positions in the chancel, and\nthese tombs differ from all others in that they form an integral part\nof the structure, and could not have been added after the church was\ncompleted.\n\nAnother thing sometimes to be seen is the ambery, or aumbry, a small\ncupboard let into the chancel wall, in which were kept the communion\nvessels, the chalice, paten, etc.\n\nThe great object of interest, however, in the chancel, is the altar,\nwhich Archbishop Laud directed should be enclosed by rails, so that\nalthough the people may draw near, they cannot touch the holy table, but\nmust accept from the hands of the priest those gifts of which he is the\nminister from God.\n\nAltars are fully described in a following chapter, but we may here note\nthat the reredos, so universally found in our cathedrals, abbeys, and\nin many of our churches, forms no part of the altar, and the Court of\nArches has decided that there are no altars in the Church of England,\nbut only communion tables.\n\nProminent among the external enrichments of our churches is the\ngargoyle, a word derived from the French, \"gargouille,\" which in its\nturn comes from the Latin \"gurgulio\"--a water-spout. The earliest\ngargoyles are merely orifices with a lip to shoot the water well away\nfrom the fabric. The true gargoyle, however, was quickly evolved from\nthis primitive form, and consists of two parts, the lower one forming\nthe channel, the upper one being the cover. The full significance of the\nskill displayed by the old masons in the rare opportunity the gargoyle\nafforded them of representing the dragons, serpents, etc., in which\ntheir fancy revelled, is made apparent when we view the futile attempts\nof modern architects to introduce this feature in their churches, for\nmodern gargoyles are generally grotesque caricatures, and anything but\nhappy appendages to the buildings to which they are attached.\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Buttresses.\n _Norman_             _Decorated_\n        _Flying Buttress_\n _Early English_      _Perpendicular_\n _Drawn by E. M. Heath._]\n\nThe churchyard, so pleasing an adjunct to the House of God placed within\nit, is frequently approached through a lych-gate, which word is derived\nfrom the Saxon _lich_, a corpse. These gates in our country churchyards\nare often very picturesque little structures, and under them the corpse\nat a funeral awaited the officiating priest before being taken into the\nchurch. The churchyard is commonly regarded as a mere dependency of the\nchurch, and as having a history very inferior in interest to that of the\ntemple to which it is the court. The truth is that many of our churchyards\nhave an antiquity far greater than that of the churches, as many of them\nconstituted the open-air meeting-places of our Saxon forefathers long\nbefore the erection of parish churches. In the common meeting-place a\ncross was set up, either of wood or stone, to mark and hallow the spot,\nand when a church was subsequently built it was usually in the immediate\nvicinity of the cross, which accounts for the fact that many churchyard\ncrosses are of older date than the churches themselves.\n\nWells of water are often found in old churchyards, and as the\nregulations of the Saxon church required immersion and not sprinkling,\nit is possible that these were the Saxon fonts.\n\nSuch then is the necessarily brief attempt to describe the main lines on\nwhich our old churches were planned, and the motives and ideals which\nanimated their builders, who, being impressed with the dignity and\nmystery of the works of God, made their churches symbolical of the\nportions of the Christian life; the porch signifying baptism, the nave\nthe life militant on earth, and the chancel the life eternal; while\nevery little ornament, piece of sculpture and enrichment was designed to\nremind the worshippers of their faith, of its hopes, blessed promises\nand rewards.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\nEARLY BRITISH CHURCHES.\n\n\nIn dealing with the introduction of church architecture into our own\nland, the task would be much simplified if one could state with\ncertainty when the first church was built on British soil. Some\nhistorians assert that the Church of England as it is constituted to-day\ndates no further back than the moment when S. Augustine and his\nfollowers landed on the shores of Kent in the year 596, yet one is\nprobably justified in assuming that a church existed in these islands\nfor centuries previous to the arrival of the Roman missionaries.\nUnfortunately we have no records to guide us as to the date of this\nearlier settlement, and the name of the first Christian missionary to\nheathen Britain has still to be discovered. \"We see,\" says the quaint\nold historian, Thomas Fuller, \"the light of the word shined here, but\nsee not who kindled it.\" The first Christian building of which we have\nany record was probably that erected at Glastonbury before the year 300,\nbut that this was the first Christian settlement cannot be alleged with\ncertainty.\n\nThere are many traditions concerning the introduction of Christianity\ninto Britain, some of which may probably have some bearing on the truth,\nbut the whole subject is involved in considerable obscurity. One of\nthese numerous traditions is to the effect that the British King\nCaradoc, after being taken prisoner to Rome, was allowed to return, on\ncondition that several members of his family remained as hostages; and\nwhilst serving in this capacity, his mother, son, and daughter are\nstated to have become converts to Christianity, the doctrines of which\nfaith they spread in their native land on their return thereto. Another\ntradition is to the effect that S. Paul himself visited Britain and laid\nthe foundation of the Christian faith. We are also told by eminent\nchurch historians that the father and grandfather of S. Patrick were\nChristians, in which case S. Patrick himself would from a very early age\nhave been brought up in the tenets of their faith. He is said to have\nbeen seized by pirates in the Clyde and taken to the north of Ireland,\nand eventually to Gaul. He was subsequently restored to his friends,\nwhom he wished to convert to the Christian faith, and for this purpose\nhis father sent him to be taught in the schools of Tours, Auxerre and\nLerins. Eventually he was consecrated Bishop of the Irish and organized\nan efficient ecclesiastical system in Ireland.\n\n [Illustration: A Rood Screen with a Restoration of the Rood.\n  Kenn, Devon. _Photograph by Chapman._]\n\nBefore the coming of the Anglo-Saxons the church seems to have\nestablished a firm hold on the people, who held tenaciously to their\npossessions, both secular and religious, which were only wrested from\nthem after a severe struggle. Their enthusiastic love of Christianity\nled them to make a heroic defence of the churches, rather than see them\nfall into the hands of the heathen Anglo-Saxons. The historian Bede\ntells us that all their buildings were destroyed, the priests' blood was\nspilt upon the altars, prelates and people were slain with the sword,\nand all the cities and churches were burnt to the ground. When all was\nlost and there was no longer a church or home to defend, the Britons\nretired to the country of their fellow-Christians, the secluded and\nalmost impenetrable hills and forests of the west. The Anglo-Saxon love\nof gold was quickly recognised by the people of West Wales who saved\ntheir property and bought the right of worshipping after the manner of\ntheir fathers by the payment of an annual tribute to their conquerors.\n\n [Side note: Church of S. Piran, Perranporth.]\n\nSo ruthlessly indeed did the Anglo-Saxons rase to the ground the early\nchurches, that, until a few years ago, but few traces of these early\nbuildings were thought to exist. An accidental discovery, however, in\nthe year 1835, brought to light an undoubted relic of an early British\nchurch in the west, this being the remains of a little church which had\nbeen until the date above mentioned completely buried in the sand\non the sea coast near Perranporth in Cornwall. They are thought by\necclesiologists to be the remains of the original church erected to the\nmemory of S. Piran, a Cornish missionary and a friend of S. Patrick, who\nwas buried within its walls before the year 500 A.D. On removing the\nsand, the accumulated deposit of centuries, the church was found to have\nconsisted of a nave and chancel containing a stone altar.\n\n [Illustration: The Church of S. Martin, Canterbury.]\n\nThe building measured 29 feet in length, 16-1/3 feet in width and 19\nfeet from the floor to the roof, and probably shares with S. Mary's\nChurch in Dover Castle, and S. Martin's, Canterbury, the honour of being\none of the earliest links we possess with the ancient British Church. S.\nMary's, Dover, appears to have been built of Roman bricks and cement, a\ncombination which antiquaries consider is found only in those buildings\nwhich were erected during the Roman occupation.\n\n [Side note: S. Martin's Canterbury.]\n\nS. Martin's Church, Canterbury has many claims to be considered one of\nour most interesting churches, no less on account of its associations\nthan for its structural interest. The date of its building has been a\nsource of endless controversy, as it contains many features attributable\nto either Roman or Saxon architecture. It is thought that it may\npossibly have been used for worship by the Christian soldiers of the\nRoman army. Be this as it may, it is established beyond doubt that it\nwas the oratory of Queen Bertha, the first English Christian queen, who\nhere worshipped, with her chaplain Liudhard, long before the advent of\nS. Augustine, who himself in later times preached here; and within the\nwalls of this cradle of English Christianity, Ethelbert, King of Kent,\nthe husband of Queen Bertha was baptized. The Venerable Bede, writing\nwithin a hundred years of the death of S. Augustine states that there\nwas in 597 A.D. in Canterbury, a church \"dedicated to the honour of S.\nMartin and built while the Romans still occupied Britain.\" On the\ndeparture of the Romans it is probable that the church was still used by\na small band of Christian worshippers until the heathen Jutes overran\nthe Isle of Thanet in 449.\n\nLittle is known of the progress of Christianity on this island from that\ndate until the landing of S. Augustine in 597, and the first fruits of\nhis mission, as we have seen, was the conversion and baptism of King\nEthelbert. As one would naturally expect, the aspect of the structure\nto-day, though suggestive of antiquity, is lacking in uniformity of\ntreatment. The brick courses in the nave are at irregular intervals,\nvarying from nine to twenty inches apart, the spaces being filled with\nKentish rag-stone and occasional blocks of chalk. The chancel extends\neighteen or twenty feet east of the arch and is composed of Roman\nbricks, evenly laid and averaging four bricks to a foot.\n\n [Illustration: An Ancient Window built with Roman Brickwork.\n Swanscombe, Kent. _Photograph Mr. G. H. Smith._]\n\nThe chancel was lengthened at the beginning of the thirteenth century\nand again at a more recent date, so that its architecture to-day is\nof three distinct periods. Outside may be seen five flat pilaster\nbuttresses and one semi-circular one, a square-headed Roman doorway, a\nSaxon doorway and two Early English porches; and there is also a nearly\ncircular panel on the south side of the nave, and a Norman squint at the\nwest end. There are many other features of interest which bear evidences\nof a great antiquity, and the only question which is seriously disputed\nis whether the earliest portion of the present nave was built about the\nend of the Roman occupation of Britain or during the mission of S.\nAugustine. The Rev. Charles F. Routledge, M.A., F.S.A., Hon. Canon of\nCanterbury Cathedral, writes: \"Whatever may finally be determined to be\nthe date of the church's foundation, it can never lose its unique\nassociation with S. Augustine, King Ethelbert and Queen Bertha, nor its\nundisputed claim to be the oldest existing church in England. From it\nflowed the tiny spring of English Christianity, which has since widened\nout into a mighty river, and penetrated the remotest parts of the\ncivilized and uncivilized world.\"\n\n [Side note: Other Early Churches.]\n\nAmong other churches which show signs of having been built during the\nRoman occupation are those of Reculver, Richborough and Lyminge, while\nthe foundations of an undoubted early church have been discovered in\nthe old Roman city of Silchester, in Hampshire. _See frontispiece._ The\nold church at Reculver stood originally within the Roman castrum, the\nfortress which guarded the northern mouth of the Wantsume, now a small\nstream, but once an arm of the sea dividing the Isle of Thanet from the\nmainland. The greater part of this church was pulled down in 1809, but\nthe western towers, known as \"the sisters\" were repaired by Trinity\nHouse, as they constitute a useful landmark for mariners, being visible\nat a great distance.\n\nReculver church was built about A.D. 670, and from the existing walls\nand foundations it is clear that its plan was basilican. The church\nis now a ruin, but some stone pillars which supported the arches are\npreserved in the Cathedral Close at Canterbury.\n\nAs Reculver guarded the northern mouth of the watercourse, so\nRichborough protected the south, and here traces of a chapel in the\nform of a cross are plainly discernible amongst ruins known to be of\nRoman workmanship. The old church at Lyminge in the same county is thus\ndescribed by Canon Jenkyns, in his \"_History of Lyminge_\":--\"The Roman\nfoundations discoverable at the south-east angle of the chancel, together\nwith the remarkable half-arch that intervenes, marked the site of the\n_aquilonalis porticus_--the title of basilica already given to it in the\nseventh century establishes its claim to great antiquity.\"\n\nWe thus see that although remains of the actual buildings in which the\nBritish Christians worshipped are few in number, yet enough are left us\nto prove conclusively that there was a very active and zealous Christian\ncommunity established in these islands during at least the period\nimmediately preceding that in which Rome withdrew her legions from\nBritain in order to defend Italy against the Goths, and abandoned our\nisland to the mercy of her foes.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nEARLY CHURCH ARCHITECTURE.\n\n\nIn the early years of the Christian Church, when its members became\nsufficiently free from persecution to erect buildings for the purpose of\nworship, they were naturally anxious to avoid any of the forms peculiar\nto either heathen or Jewish temples. Some model, however, was necessary,\nand their choice being limited, they appear to have adopted the\nsimple style of the Roman basilica, or court of justice. There was an\nadaptability about the general plan of such a building which rendered\nits selection natural and not inappropriate, while the dignified\nsimplicity of its construction and the object for which it was primarily\nfounded--the dispensation of justice--commended it no doubt in the first\ninstance as a model for the primitive Christian church. These basilic\u00e6\nwere usually enclosures surrounded by a colonnade, sometimes roofed, but\nmore often open to the air, and designedly built for the purpose of\nbeing accessible to all members of the community at all times of the\nday. They appear occasionally to have been used for the transaction of\nordinary business in which they would closely resemble our exchanges. Be\nthis as it may, this form of architecture has left its impress on many\nChristian buildings, and the name of basilica, for a church, is still\nused in many parts of Italy.\n\nThe Roman basilica was usually in the form of a parallelogram, with a\nseat for the judges at one end, and in their adaptation of this form of\nbuilding, the early Christians devoted this place to the purposes of an\naltar. This, by an easy and natural transition, is thought to have given\nrise to the formation of the semi-circular recess at one end of the\nbuilding, known as the apse (from the Latin _apsis_, a bow or arch),\nwhich is still to be found in some of our older churches.\n\nBeing thus Roman in the nature of their ground plan, it is not\nsurprising to find that other portions of the early Christian buildings\nshow decided characteristics of a Roman style. On the destruction of the\nPagan temples by order of the Emperor Constantine about the year 330,\nmuch of their material was built into the earliest Christian churches,\nand the Roman character of their design being prevalent, they formed a\nstyle of architecture which has been designated Romanesque, of which the\nlater styles, known here as Saxon and Norman were largely modifications.\nThere is no reason to doubt that the earliest Christian churches were\nvery unpretentious in form and that some time elapsed before there was\nanything which could be called a definite church architecture, beyond\nthat to which we have alluded. Nevertheless, as the Church strengthened\nher position and grew in security, more attention was devoted to the\nsubject of its edifices, and the departure in time from the original\nground plan furnished an opportunity for the introduction of a more\nsymbolical and appropriate design. The plan of the old basilica was\nabandoned for one in the form of the cross, the accepted symbol of the\nChristian religion, which departure, however, did not involve any very\ngreat alteration from the old ground plan.\n\nWe come then to the time when one or other of the forms known as the\nLatin or the Greek cross--whichever was most convenient--was usually\nemployed in a building designed for Christian worship, and these forms\nare universally found in the most elaborate structures of which the\nChristian Church can boast.\n\nAs time passed, these cruciform churches were surmounted with a dome,\nsteeple, or tower at the point where the members of the cross\nintersected each other. At first the most prominent of these external\nadornments was the dome; a characteristic of the architecture of Eastern\nEurope, which acquired the name Byzantine, from its having been carried\nto great perfection in Byzantium (Constantinople), the capital of the\nEastern Empire.\n\nThe church of S. Sophia, which was built, much as it now exists, early\nin the sixth century, and was afterwards converted into a mosque, is an\nalmost perfect example of the Byzantine style. In this building we find\nthe Roman arch used in a variety of ways, while the dome itself is\nformed entirely of this arch used as the crowning work of the edifice.\nEastern churches in this style usually took the form of the Greek cross,\nthis form being better calculated to support the weight of the cupola.\nIn Western Europe, however, where the flat squat tower afterwards\ndeveloped into the steeple, as we shall see in a later chapter, the\nLatin cross was mostly used, and this, with a few notable exceptions, is\nthe plan of most western churches.\n\nWith writers of about fifty years ago, it was a favourite theory that\nthe Christians converted the old basilic\u00e6 into churches, and that the\n\"Halls of Justice\" erected by the Romans in this country were also\nconverted into Christian churches, and some authorities point to the\nwalls and arches of Brixworth church in confirmation of this theory. The\nlate Mr. J. W. Brewer, however, stated that unfortunately for this\ntheory, no single example of a basilica being converted into a church\nhas been found in this country and he himself held the theory that the\nword basilica was used by the Romans to describe any building which was\nsupported by internal columns, and in that way the name came to be\napplied to Christian churches.\n\nAs we have seen, the early Christians, after a short time, became\ndissatisfied with these buildings adapted from Pagan types, and the\nByzantine form of church arose, the first people who practised this\nstyle of building being the Greeks. The style spread with rapidity all\nover the East, the great church of S. Sophia being its largest example\nand the smaller, but more perfect, church of S. Mark at Venice giving us\nthe best idea of this form of church architecture. Largely modelled on\nthis style, also, are the circular baptisteries of Italy and the round\nchurches of England, France and Germany, the modern Russian churches and\nall the Mohammedan mosques. The Latin churches did not greatly favour\nthis style and their use of it was confined, with few exceptions, to\nbaptisteries, monumental chapels and the like, but for parochial,\ncathedral and monastic churches, the oblong plan was retained and\nultimately developed into the Gothic church with its nave, transepts and\nchancel.\n\nThe changes which the Christian basilica at first underwent were simple,\n_viz._, the use of the arch instead of the straight lintel, or the\nplacing of an entablature between the columns; a little later, about the\ntenth century, the old wooden roof of the basilica gave place to the\narched roof or vaulting, so called from its being composed of a series\nof vaults. The styles called Romanesque and Lombardic are but\ngeographical varieties of the same architecture and from these the Saxon\nand Norman styles were soon to be developed. The vaulted basilica church\nsoon became common over the north of Europe, the two most important and\npractically unaltered examples being the cathedrals of Speyer and Worms,\nin Germany, although our Anglo-Saxon cathedrals of Peterborough, Ely and\nNorwich may, so far as regards their naves, be justly regarded as the\noffspring of the vaulted basilica style of building.\n\nWhen the old basilica style of church with its heavy beam roof and its\ninnumerable columns had ceased to satisfy the lofty aspirations of Latin\nChristianity, and when the Greeks had inaugurated a new style of church\narchitecture, only two courses were left to the Latins, either to adopt\nthe Greek style in its entirety, or to improve upon the basilica type.\nFortunately, although after considerable hesitation, they chose the\nlatter alternative, the result being the genesis of our glorious\ncathedrals with their long naves and aisles, deep transepts and\nbeautiful variety of form and outline.\n\n [Illustration: A Reputed Saxon Doorway.\n  Bishopstone, Sussex. _Photograph Mr. W. Hodgson._]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\nTHE SAXON AND NORMAN STYLES.\n\n\nAs we have seen in the previous chapter, the whole subject of pre-Saxon\nchurch building is still very obscure, and for some considerable time\nafter the Anglo-Saxon invasion little is known concerning church\narchitecture, nor has it yet been fully ascertained whether any\nbuildings of this period exist. By the year 588 the Saxons were in\ncomplete possession of the land. Christianity was to all appearance\nwiped out and the Church, to the superficial observer was dead. In his\n\"_History of English Church Architecture_,\" Scott expresses the opinion\nthat the oldest English churches may be divided into three groups.\nFirst, those which preceded the Danish invasion; secondly, those from\nthe above epoch to the invasion of Sweyn; and thirdly, those onward to\nthe Norman Conquest.\n\n [Side note: Saxon Architecture.]\n\nWhat exactly constituted Saxon architecture has long been a\ncontroversial point and one which will probably never be definitely\nsettled. Parker, in his \"_Glossary of Architecture_,\" says:--\n\n    \"For a considerable time, after they (the Anglo-Saxons) had\n    established themselves in this country, their buildings were\n    of wood, and this appears to have been the prevailing material\n    employed at the time of the Conquest, although stone had been\n    occasionally used several centuries earlier.... No timber-work\n    of Saxon date can be in existence at the present time, but it is\n    contended by some antiquaries that several of our churches exhibit\n    specimens of Saxon masonry; the truth of this theory, however, is\n    not fully established, nor has the subject of Saxon architecture\n    been yet sufficiently investigated to clear away the obscurity in\n    which it is involved.\"\n\nProbably few of our so-called Saxon churches were built earlier than\nthirty or forty years before the Norman Conquest, and it seems certain\nthat for some years after they had settled in England, the Normans\nemployed Saxon masons to build in the Saxon manner, as is seen by the\ntower of S. Michael's Church, Oxford, which, although showing all the\ncharacteristics of reputed Saxon masonry was built many years after the\nBattle of Hastings. Certain it is that these pre-Norman buildings in\nEngland were singularly rude and rough and show how much our Saxon\nancestors were, at that period, behind the Italians, French and Germans\nin architectural skill.\n\n [Side note: Saxon Churches.]\n\nOur best examples containing Saxon work are possibly the churches at\nSompting and Bishopstone, Sussex; Bradford-on-Avon; Wootton Wawen\n(sub-structure of tower); Wing; Brixworth, and Barnack, Northants;\nGreenstead in Essex; and S. Martin's at Wareham, Dorset. Of towers of\nthis date the best are possibly those of S. Mary's and S. Peter's,\nLincoln and S. Benet's, Cambridge. Of crypts, the finest examples are\nat Ripon Cathedral, York Minster (part) and S. Mary's Church, York. In\naddition to these, many other churches have chancel arches, doorways or\nsome other less important features which are considered to be of Saxon\norigin.\n\nThese early buildings generally show the semi-circular arch on the\ndoorways, but the windows usually have a triangular head; at Sompting\nchurch, however, the windows have the semi-circular arch. It is\nnecessary to say a few words in detail about the more important churches\nof this era.\n\n [Side note: S. Lawrence, Bradford-on-Avon.]\n\nThe church of S. Lawrence at Bradford-on-Avon is one of the oldest\nunaltered churches in England, and it seems to be beyond question that\nit is the actual church built by Ealdhelm at the beginning of the eighth\ncentury and dedicated by him to S. Lawrence. It consists of a chancel,\nnave and north porch, and among its remarkable features is its great\nheight and the extreme narrowness of the round-headed arch between the\nnave and the chancel, a feature it has in common with the Saxon church\nof S. Martin at Wareham; the ground-plan measurements of both these\nchurches are identical. At S. Lawrence's church, an incised arcade is\nseen outside the walls, and on either side of the west aspect of the\nchancel arch are two sculptured figures of angels, which are thought to\nrepresent the earliest extant fragments of church carving in England.\n\n [Side note: Brixworth, Earls' Barton and Barnack.]\n\nBrixworth church is possibly older than S. Lawrence's and it is said to\nhave been in continuous use for Divine Service ever since it was\nerected. The tower appears to be of rather later date than the nave and\nrests upon the walls of a \"narthex\" or portico, which may have extended\nalong the whole breadth of the front, as is still to be seen in churches\nat Rome and Ravenna. The curious pile of masonry built up against the\ntower may have been added for defence, as it could hardly have formed\npart of the original design.\n\n [Illustration: Tower of Earls' Barton Church.\n  Generally considered to show characteristics of Saxon masonry.]\n\nEarls' Barton and Barnack churches both have towers so covered with\nnarrow projecting strips of stonework that the surface of the walls\nappears divided into rudely formed panels. The west doorways of both\nshow primitive imitations of Roman mouldings in the imposts and\narchitraves. The tower of Earls' Barton consists of four stages, each\nof which is slightly smaller than the one below. In that of Barnack\nchurch, the upper stages of the tower represent the period of transition\nfrom Norman to Early English.\n\n [Illustration: An Example of a Norman Tower.\n  Bishopstone, Sussex. _Homeland Copyright._]\n\nS. Michael's, Oxford, has a massive tower of solid masonry, unpierced in\nits lowest stage by either door or window, the second stage shows but\none window and the highest is pierced by several windows of more\nelaborate construction.\n\n [Side note: St. Michael's Church, Oxford.]\n\nAlthough generally consisting of rubble and stone, Saxon churches were\nsometimes built of wood as we see from the existing nave of the parish\nchurch of Greenstead, Essex.\n\n [Side note: Greenstead Church, Essex.]\n\nA brick chancel has been added at the east and a timber belfry at the\nwest end, but the old Saxon portion is composed of large chestnut trees\nsplit asunder and set upright close to each other with the round side\noutwards. The ends are roughly hewn so as to fit into a sill at the\nbottom, and into a plate at the top, where they are fastened with wooden\npins. There are 16 logs on the south side where are two doorposts, and\non the north side twenty-one logs and two spaces now filled with rubble.\nThere is a tradition that this church was erected to receive the body of\nS. Edmund, on its return from London to Bury, in 1013.\n\nThe semi-circular arch has long been considered to be one of the most\ndistinctive marks of Norman architecture, but Mr. Rickman, who made an\nexhaustive study of the early churches of France and England, says:--\n\n    \"In various churches it has happened that a very plain arch\n    between nave and chancel has been left as the only Norman feature,\n    while both nave and chancel have been rebuilt at different times;\n    but each leaving the chancel arch standing. I am disposed to think\n    that some of these plain chancel arches, will, on minute\n    examination, turn out to be of Saxon origin.\"\n\nIt would be tedious to enter into any more minute account of the\nAnglo-Saxon ecclesiastical remains, and the reader whose enquiries\nconduct him to the more elaborate works on the subject will be startled\nby the contrary opinions that he will surely encounter.\n\nIn concluding these brief remarks on early buildings, we must again\nquote from Parker's work to which reference has already been made:--\n\n    \"The class of buildings referred to as being considered to belong\n    to this style contain some rather unusual features, and they\n    require to be particularly described, both because they are in\n    themselves remarkable, and because there is a probability that\n    some of them may be Saxon.\"\n\n [Illustration: A Norman Pier Arcade.\n  Abbots Langley, Herts. _Photograph Mr. A. W. Anderson._]\n\nThe Norman style of church architecture with its varied forms of\ncolumns, moulded and recessed arches and vaulting, may be roughly stated\nto have been introduced into England at the time of the Conquest. The\nSaxon masons do not appear to have understood vaulting sufficiently well\nto have roofed over any large space with stone, and for this reason\nalone the Saxon form of building was bound to give way before the\nNorman, which of all the earlier styles was the most advanced in this\nrespect.\n\n [Side note: Norman Architecture.]\n\nGenerally speaking, Norman arches were semi-circular, but they were by\nno means universally so, for a form frequently found is one in which the\nspring of the arch does not take place from the abacus, or upper member\nof the capital, but at some distance above it and when it assumes this\nform it is called a \"stilted\" arch, suggested by some authorities to\nhave been unintentional and the result of imperfect construction or\nplanning. _See page 10._\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Norman Mouldings.\n  Chevron or Zig-zag.        Star.\n  Alternate Billet.          Square Billet.\n  Double Cone.               Lozenge.\n  Beak Head.                 Bird Head.]\n\nThe main features in the ornamentation of this period are the sculptured\nbands worked round the arches, which, although generally called\n\"mouldings,\" are more in the nature of decoration, and in some instances\nthey appear to be additions carved on the originally unadorned surface\nof the masonry.\n\n [Side note: Ornament.]\n\nThe earliest and most general ornament is the chevron or zig-zag, which\nis frequently found doubled, trebled and quadrupled. The next most\ncommon form is the beak-head, consisting of a hollow and large round.\nIn the hollow are placed heads of beasts or birds whose tongues or beaks\nencircle the round. On the west doorway of Iffley church, Oxford, are\nmany of these beak-heads extending the whole length of the jamb down to\nthe base moulding. They also figure prominently among the ornamentations\nof the hospital church of S. Cross, near Winchester. The zig-zag\nmoulding is very common on Norman churches and is so easily recognised\nthat no further description is needed here. The less prominent decorations\nof Norman mouldings include the alternate billet, the double cone, and\nthe lozenge, together with an immense number of others less commonly\nfound.\n\n [Side note: Windows.]\n\nThe Early Norman window was little better than a narrow slit finished\nwith a plain semi-circular head, and was generally only a few inches\nwide. They were, it is believed, filled with oiled linen and the sides\nof the aperture were splayed towards the interior. Later in the period,\nthe windows were enriched by the zig-zag and other mouldings and at a\nstill later period an improvement was made by inserting nook-shafts in\nthe jambs similar to those in doorways.\n\n [Illustration: A Late Norman Parish Church.\n  Castle Rising, Norfolk. _Drawn by Gordon Home._]\n\nThe towers of Norman churches often show windows of two lights separated\nby a central shaft, all enclosed under a large semi-circular arch, the\nspandrel of which is rarely pierced. Plain circular windows of small\ndimensions are sometimes found in other positions and in churches of\nlater date, and occasionally in gable walls. Larger windows of the same\nform, with small shafts radiating from the centre and connected at the\ncircumference by semi-circular or trefoiled arches, are also found as at\nBarfreston church, Kent, where there is a fine example.\n\n [Side note: Doorways.]\n\nNorman doorways are found in great numbers and variety, even in churches\nwhich present no other features in this style. The most usual form\nconsists of a semi-circular-headed aperture with a hood-mould springing\nfrom plain square-edged jambs. Frequently, however, the doorways are\nrecessed, having a nook-shaft in the angle formed by a recession from\nthe capital, in which case it presents two soffits and two faces,\nbesides the hood-moulds. The depth of these doorways is largely due to\nthe great thickness of the walls usual in buildings of this period, but\nin many cases that portion of the wall in which the entrance is inserted\nis made to project forward beyond the general face, which projection is\nfinished either with plain horizontal capping, or a high-pitched gable.\n\n [Illustration: _West Doorway Rochester Cathedral_\n  Duncan Moul.]\n\nNorman porches thus have generally but little projection, and are\nfrequently so flat as to be little more than outer mouldings to the\ninner door. They are, however, often richly ornamented and have rooms\nabove, which rooms are wrongly called \"parvises.\" The shallow aperture\noften follows the form of the arch, but is frequently square-headed,\nhaving a semi-circular tympanum of masonry filling the space between the\nlintel of the door and the intrados of the arch.\n\n [Illustration: Tympanum of Norman Doorway.\n  Fordington S. George, Dorset. _Drawn by E. M. Heath._]\n\nThese tympana are usually sculptured in low relief with a representation\nof some scriptural or traditional event, while the assertion of the\nApostle that \"we must, through much tribulation, enter into the kingdom\nof God,\" may account for the fondness of the Norman sculptors in\nrepresenting different stages of martyrdom on the tympana of their\ndoors. A very singular tympanum is that on the door of the church of\nFordington S. George, at Dorchester, whereon is represented some\nincident in the life of S. George. The principal figure is on horseback\nwith a discus round his head. The other figures are in hauberks and\nchausses, and generally bear, in point of costume, much resemblance to\nthe figures on the famous Bayeux tapestry. Barfreston church, Kent, has\nan interesting tympanum, as also has Patrixbourne church in the same\ncounty, where the sculpture shows the Saviour with dragons and at his\nfeet a dog. At Alveston church, Warwickshire, the sculpture shows two\nquadrupeds with enormous tails, fighting, with between them a small\nbird, possibly intended for a dove. Our best example of a Norman doorway\nand tympanum is generally considered to be the west doorway of\nRochester Cathedral, where the sculpture is of a very advanced character\nfor its date, which is probably about 1130-40.\n\n [Side note: Piers.]\n\nA distinctive feature of the Norman style are the massive pillars,\nusually circular, and with capitals either of the same form, or square;\noccasionally in plain buildings the pillars themselves are square with\nvery little or no ornamentation. Towards the end of the period, an\noctagonal pillar was often used, having a much lighter appearance than\nthe earlier forms.\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Capitals.\n      Norman.             Transitional.              Norman.\n  Crypt, Winchester.  Christ Church, Oxford.  Winchester Cathedral.]\n\nBesides these plain styles, compound or clustered piers are very\nnumerous, differing considerably in plan; the simplest consists of a\nsquare having one or more rectangular recesses at each corner, but one\nmore frequently met with has a small circular shaft in each of the\nrecesses and a larger semi-circular one on each side of the square.\n\n [Side note: Capitals.]\n\nNorman capitals are very varied, having many different forms of\nornamentation; the commonest is one which resembles a bowl with the\nsides truncated, reducing the upper part to a square; sometimes the\nlower part is cut into round mouldings and ornamented, but it is\nfrequently left plain. The Norman capital in its earliest style was of\nshort proportions, but afterwards it became longer, with lighter\nornamentation, gradually merging into the Early English.\n\n [Illustration: A Curious Norman Capital. Seaford, Sussex.]\n\nThe bishops and abbots of this period appear to have possessed\nconsiderable skill in architecture, for no fewer than fifteen of our\nEnglish cathedrals contain some important Norman work, as the older\nportions of the cathedrals of Canterbury, Durham, Winchester,\nGloucester, Peterborough, Ely, Norwich, Lincoln and Oxford.\n\n [Side note: Norman Buttresses.]\n\nThe Norman buttress, better described by Mr. Sharpe as a pilaster strip,\nunlike those of the later period, projects but very little from the\nwall, and this is especially so in buildings of the earlier part of the\nperiod. They are usually quite plain and are more used for finish than\nactual support; the Norman builder relying principally upon the thickness\nand weight of his walls to sustain any roof thrust (_see page 17_).\n\n [Side note: The Round Churches.]\n\nThere are in England a few round churches which are thought to have been\nbuilt by the Knights Templars, a religious community banded together for\nthe purpose of wresting the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem from the\nSaracens. Their object was to defend the Saviour's tomb and to guard\nPalestine, for which purpose they built numerous monasteries throughout\nthe Holy Land and fortified them like castles.\n\nAnother famous order which combined the religious instincts of the\ncloister with the military ardour of the warrior was that of the Knights\nof S. John Baptist or Knights Hospitallers, who, besides fighting, were\nto tend the sick and provide for the welfare of all Christian travellers.\nThe churches belonging to the Templars were usually built in circular\nform in imitation of the church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem. They\nwere capped with vaulted concave roofs said to be symbolical of the\nvast circuit and concave of the heavens. Our best example is the Temple\nChurch, London, to which was added at a later period, a beautiful Early\nEnglish Gothic extension. Other round churches are those of S. Sepulchre,\nCambridge; S. Sepulchre, Northampton; Temple Balsall, Warwickshire, and\nof Little Maplestead, Essex, which last, although the smallest, is by no\nmeans the least interesting. It is attributed to the Hospitallers, an\norder founded about the year 1092, and introduced into England in the\nreign of Henry I. At Clerkenwell may still be seen the ancient gateway\nleading to their hospital. The order was suppressed in 1545. The church\nat Little Maplestead was built early in the 12th century, and in 1186\nthe adjoining manor was given by Juliana Doisnel to this order, which\ngift was confirmed by King John and Henry III. This church is thought to\nreproduce with more fidelity than the others the original church of the\nHoly Sepulchre.\n\n [Illustration: Norman and Early English Doorways.\n  Showing the transition from one style to another.\n  Dunstable Priory Church. _Drawn by Worthington G. Smith._]\n\nThese famous Norman round-chancelled churches have much in common with\nthe old basilica form.\n\nIt must be pointed out that the arbitrary divisions into which\narchitecture has been divided--Norman, Gothic, etc., are pure figures of\nthe imagination, as by a series of easy transitions, one style became\ngradually merged into the next without any hard and fast dividing lines\nwhatever. The periods during which one style became gradually blended\ninto another are called the periods of transition.\n\n [Side note: The Transition.]\n\nArchitecture being progressive, it was only by the gradual development\nof one style from another that the art was enabled to advance with\nsocial progress, the literature and other arts of the country. The\ntransition from the Norman to the Early English style may be ascribed to\na period somewhat earlier than the 12th century, when a great change in\nthe construction of the arch began to manifest itself. Alone, however,\nthe form of the arch is no real test, for many pure Norman works have\npointed arches. The square abacus may be taken as the best test. In its\nincipient state the pointed arch exhibited a change of form only, whilst\nthe accessories and details remained the same as before; and although\nthis change gradually led to the Early Pointed style in a pure state,\nwith mouldings and features altogether distinct from those of the\nNorman, and to the general disuse, in the 13th century, of the\nsemi-circular arch, it was for a while so intermixed as, from its first\nappearance to the close of the 12th century, to constitute that state of\ntransition called the semi-Norman.\n\n\n [Illustration: Windows showing the Origin of Tracery.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nTHE EARLY ENGLISH STYLE.\n\n\nThe origin of what is loosely called Gothic architecture--which is\ngenerally considered to include the styles, with their transitions, from\nEarly English to late Perpendicular, or Tudor-Gothic--is not free\nfrom obscurity, but it is certain that it began to be employed in\necclesiastical edifices about the time that the Goths settled in Italy,\nalthough all the available evidence goes to prove that the style\noriginated and underwent its earliest developments in the north-west of\nEurope, and penetrated by slow degrees to the south and east.\n\nEngland was somewhat later than France in introducing this style of\narchitecture, our earliest purely Gothic building being Salisbury\nCathedral, begun in 1220, although the choirs of Rievaulx and Fountains\nAbbey were commenced a few years earlier. The Early English style in its\nearliest developments is nowhere seen to better advantage than in\nSalisbury Cathedral, and in its very latest forms at Westminster Abbey,\nthe period of time being chronologically measured by the reigns of\nRichard I., John and Henry III.\n\n [Illustration: An Early English Arch.\n  Rochester Cathedral. _Photograph Eastmead._]\n\nMost of our Gothic buildings were carried out under the supervision of a\nmaster-mason, but the most subordinate workman was left plenty of scope\nwithin reasonable limits for whatever artistic individuality he\npossessed, and the enrichments and ornaments of the Gothic era point out\nthe noble aim, the delicate and graceful thought, the refined and\nexquisite taste expended upon every portion of their buildings by these\nGothic masons.\n\n [Side note: The Pointed Arch.]\n\nOne of the chief differences between pure Gothic and Norman\narchitecture is in the use of the pointed form of arch, yet in the study\nof the early buildings of this date it is curious to notice how evenly\nthe balance is held between the pointed and the round arch, and how at\none time it was quite an open question whether the Gothic style would be\ndistinguished by a round or a pointed arch. In Germany and Italy the\nround arch held its own and continued to be used right through the\nMiddle Ages. In England, however, the pointed arch soon gained a decided\nvictory over its rival. Many theories have been put forward concerning\nthe introduction of the pointed arch, one amongst them being that it was\nthe result of the intersection of two circular arches such as is very\ncommonly found in late Norman work; another theory is the poetical idea\nthat it was copied from an avenue of trees. Whether or not either of\nthese theories holds good, it is quite certain that this form of arch\nwas known in the East for centuries before it reached Europe, being\nfound in cisterns and tombs in Egypt and Arabia dating from long before\nthe Christian era.\n\nIt has also been suggested that it was introduced from the East by the\nCrusaders, in which case we should have found it making its first\nappearance in Hungary, Poland, Bohemia and Russia, but it so happens\nthat these were the very last countries in Europe to adopt the pointed\narch.\n\n [Side note: The Transitional Period.]\n\nThe first form of the pointed arch, known as the Early English, was used\nfrom about 1180 to 1300, including part of the reigns of Henry II.,\nRichard I., John, Henry III. and Edward I. \"Nothing,\" says the Rev. J.\nM. Hutchinson, \"could be more striking than the change from Norman to\nEarly English. The two styles were the complete opposites of each other;\nthe round arch was replaced by the pointed, often by the acute, lancet;\nthe massive piers by graceful clustered shafts; the grotesque and\nrudely-sculptured capitals by foliage of the most exquisite character;\nand the heavy cylindrical mouldings by bands of deeply undercut\nmembers.\"\n\n [Illustration: Arcading showing the junction of the Norman\n  and Early English Masonry. Dunstable Priory Church.\n _Photograph H. A. Strange._]\n\nGothic architecture differs from all previous forms in the economical\nuse of material, and the small size of the stones used. Whereas in both\nRoman and Norman buildings the arrangement of the materials depended\nupon their strength in masses, the Gothic masons employed stones of\nsmall size in the construction of edifices of equal strength and of far\ngreater magnificence; while in constructive properties the Gothic style\nwas a great advance on anything that had gone before, as the buildings\nin this style did not depend for their stability on the vertical\npressure of columns, but on the correct adjustment of the bearings and\nthrusts of different arches operating in various directions. Owing to\nthe fact, then, that each portion of a Gothic Church helps to support\nsomething besides itself, it is obvious that such buildings could be\nerected with a far smaller quantity of material than was previously\nnecessary. The various little shafts or columns are so disposed as to\ndistribute the weight of the superstructure and thus relieve the greater\ncolumns or piers of some portion of the superincumbent weight; the\naisles help to support the nave; the walls of the side chapels act\nas abutments against the walls of the aisles, while the towers are\ngenerally placed so as to resist the accumulated thrust of all the\narches along the sides of the nave.\n\n [Illustration: An Early English Doorway. Huntingdon.]\n\nThe enrichments and little ornaments attached to mouldings, and\nparticularly those placed in the hollows, are most characteristic of the\nvarious styles of Gothic architecture. The zig-zag is peculiar to the\nNorman, the nail head to the Transitional or semi-Norman, and the dog\ntooth to the Early English.\n\n [Side note: Early English Ornament.]\n\nThis last ornament represents a flower, looking like four sweet almonds\narranged pyramidically, and there is no other ornament so distinctive of\nthis period. Early English foliage is known by reason of the stalks\nalways being shown as growing upwards from the lower ring of the\ncapital, called the astrigal. These stalks are generally grouped\ntogether and curve forward in a very graceful manner. The plants mostly\nrepresented are the wild parsley, seakale and celery, and this foliage,\ncalled stiff-leaved foliage, is found at no other period than the end of\nthe 12th century.\n\n [Side note: Early English Mouldings.]\n\nEarly English mouldings are very complicated and yet very beautiful, and\nconsist of beads, keel and scroll patterns, separated by deep hollows\ngiving a rich effect of light and shade round the arch. These deeply-cut\nhollows are also a distinctive mark of the style.\n\n [Side note: Early English Windows.]\n\nThe earliest windows of this period are long and narrow, with acutely\npointed heads, the exterior angle being merely chamfered and the\ninterior widely splayed. Somewhat later the introduction of tracery gave\na highly beautiful appearance to the windows and from the character of\nthis feature the date of the window can be fairly accurately determined.\nWhere the tracery is formed by ornamental apertures pierced through a\nplate of stone, it is called plate tracery, and is certain to be of not\nlater date than the earlier part of the 13th century. If it is bar\ntracery, with the bars forming plain circles, the work is also Early\nEnglish, but if, on the other hand, the bars form other shapes filled in\nwith patterns, or consisting of a single trefoil or quatrefoil, they are\nof later date.\n\n [Illustration: The Church of St. Margaret, Lynn.\n  West Front showing the Early English work in the base of the Tower.\n _Photograph Dexter & Son._]\n\n [Illustration: Example of Group of Thirteenth Century Lancet Windows.\n  Ockham, Surrey. _Homeland Copyright._]\n\nThe traceried window originated from the placing of a two-light narrow\nlancet window under one dripstone having a plain head, the introduction\nof tracery between the heads of the lancets and the dripstone\nbecoming necessary for beauty and lightness of the form (_see page 47_).\n\n [Side note: Early English Porches.]\n\nEarly English porches project much further from the main walls than\ndo the Norman doorways, and in large and important buildings they\nfrequently have a room above. The gables are usually bold and high\npitched, and the interiors quite as rich in design as are the\nexteriors.\n\n [Side note: Early English Doorways.]\n\nThe doorways of this period are usually pointed, though occasionally\nthey have a semi-circular head. The mouldings are boldly cut and often\nenriched with dog tooth ornament. The jambs frequently contain a shaft\nor shafts with plain or foliated capitals (_see page 51_).\n\n [Side note: Early English Capitals and Piers.]\n\nEarly English capitals are usually bell-shaped, and are, in the smaller\nexamples, quite devoid of ornament, with the exception of a necking and\none or two mouldings round the abacus. The bell is generally deeply\nundercut, which, as in the mouldings, is a strong characteristic of the\nstyle. The nail head and dog tooth ornaments sometimes appear in the\nhollows between the mouldings. In the large examples the bell is covered\nwith foliage, which, springing direct from the necking, curls over most\ngracefully beneath the abacus. In clustered piers the capitals follow\nthe form of the pier, and they also adopt the same form in the single\nshaft, with the exception that multiangular shafts have often circular\ncapitals. The base consists of a series of mouldings and frequently\nstands upon a double or single plinth, which in the earlier examples\nis square, but in later examples assumes the form of the base, and is\neither circular or polygonal. At Stone church, Kent, is a good example\nof an Early English capital, decorated with stiff-leaved foliage, and\nthe dog tooth ornament, which in this case is seen between the mouldings\nof the arch, and is of a perforated character.\n\n [Side note: Early English Buttresses.]\n\nThe buttresses (_see page 17_) of this period are, as a rule, simple\nin form, and in small churches consist of two or more stages, each\nset-off or division being sloped at the top to carry off the rain. In\nlarger buildings the buttress generally finishes with a triangular head\nor gable, and is frequently carried above the parapet, except where\nstone vaulting is used, in which case it is covered with a pinnacle\neither plain or ornamented. The edges are often chamfered or the\nangles ornamented with slender shafts. A niche to contain a statue is\noccasionally sunk in the face of the buttress, but this feature is\nmore common in the next or Decorated period, although the change from\none period to another was so gradual that the exact date of a niched\nbuttress would be difficult to determine were there no other features to\nguide us.\n\n [Illustration: Salisbury Cathedral. Begun in 1220.\n  The spire was added, 1350. _Drawn by Sidney Heath._]\n\nFlying buttresses were first introduced at this period, and are common\nin all large buildings with vaulted roofs. They are generally of simple\ndesign, with a plain capping and archivolt, and they spring from the\nwall buttress to the clerestory (_see page 17_).\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Early English Capitals and Ornament.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\nTHE DECORATED STYLE.\n\n\nThe best examples of Gothic architecture may be said to have been\nerected between the years 1180 and 1300, and from the latter year many\nwriters date the commencement of its decline. In England we owe nearly\nthe whole of such magnificent buildings as the cathedrals of Lincoln,\nSalisbury, Worcester, and the abbey of Westminster to the 13th century,\nand there is scarcely a cathedral or abbey that does not owe some\nbeautiful portion of its structure to the builders of the same period,\nthe transepts and lady chapel of Hereford Cathedral, the eastern\ntransepts of Durham, the nave and transepts of Wells, the transepts of\nYork, the choir presbytery, central and eastern transepts of Rochester,\nthe eastern portion of the choir of Ely, the west front of Peterborough,\nthe choir of Southwell, the nave and transepts of Lichfield, and the\nchoir of S. David's being a few of our most characteristic examples of\nthis period. The style which followed the Early English is known as the\nGeometric or Early Decorated style, and it embraces roughly the end\nof the 13th century and the first twenty or thirty years of the 14th\ncentury, and continued in its later or Curvilinear form to near the end\nof that century. Perhaps the most perfect example of the Geometric style\nin the world is the cathedral church at Amiens, which is usually called\nthe _mother church_ of this style, and although she has many daughters,\nnone of them can be said to equal their parent in beauty.\n\nIn England the most perfect examples are not to be looked for in\ncathedrals and large churches, but in their chapels, and the most superb\nspecimen we possessed, S. Stephen's Chapel, Westminster, has been\ndestroyed within comparatively recent years. Those left to us include\nthe chapel of the palace of the bishops of Ely, in Ely Place, Holborn,\nnow the Roman Catholic Church of S. Etheldreda, a building almost\nidentical in plan with the vanished chapel of S. Stephen. Trinity\nChurch, Ely, once Our Lady's Chapel, and Prior Crawden's Chapel,\nin the same city, are lovely examples of the latest development of\nthe Curvilinear style, while the former is considered the most\nhighly-wrought building in England. Belonging to this period, also,\nis the choir of Merton College Chapel, Oxford, and Luton Church.\n\nThe Decorated style may be divided as regards its windows into two\nclasses--Geometric and Curvilinear. The first has tracery evolved\nentirely from the circle. The Curvilinear style is distinguished by\ntraceries formed by curved and flowing lines. _See pages 15 and 59._\n\n [Side note: Decorated Windows.]\n\nDecorated windows are usually large and contain from two to seven\nlights, although one sometimes finds a window with a single light, but\nof less elongated form than those of the Early English period.\n\nAs we have seen in a previous chapter, tracery originated from the\nnecessity of piercing that portion of the wall which was left vacant\nwhen two lights were gathered under a single arched dripstone, and\ntherefore elementary tracery consisted merely of apertures in a flat\nsurface. As the possibilities of this ornamental feature became better\nunderstood, the mullions were recessed from the face of the wall and the\nfine effect thus produced was, as the art progressed, much enhanced by\nthe introduction of various orders of mullions, and by recessing certain\nportions of the tracery from the face of the mullions and their\ncorresponding bars. The geometrical tracery, as we have seen, consists\nof various combinations of the circle, as the trefoil, based on the\ntriangle, the quatrefoil on the square, the cinquefoil on the pentagon,\netc.\n\n [Illustration: A Late Decorated Window in a Parish Church.\n  East Sutton, Kent. _Photograph Gardner Waterman._]\n\nIn Curvilinear windows the tracery, although based on the same forms and\nfigures, is yet so blended into an intricate pattern that each figure\ndoes not stand out with the same individuality as in the Geometric.\nAmong our most beautiful Geometric windows are those of the Lady Chapel\nat Exeter, Ely Chapel, and Merton Chapel, Oxford, and of the Curvilinear\nour best example is probably the east window of Carlisle Cathedral.\n\nIt must be noted that beautiful as are Curvilinear windows, yet they\nmark a certain decadence in Gothic architecture, in that it is an\nirrational treatment of stone, and conveys the idea that the material\nwas bent and not cut into the required shape, it being a well-established\ncanon in art that when strength is sacrificed to mere elegance it marks\na decline in that art.\n\n [Side note: Decorated Capitals and Piers.]\n\nDecorated capitals as a rule follow the contour of the pier in clustered\ncolumns, and are either bell-shaped or octagonal. They are frequently\nonly moulded, thus presenting rounds, ogees and hollows, on which the\nprevailing ornaments of the period, the ball and the square flower,\nare set. The foliated sculpture is most exquisite, and is gracefully\nwreathed around the bell, instead of rising from the astrigal or upper\nmember of the capital, as in the earlier style.\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Decorated Ornament.\n  Finial                 Capital           Finial\n (Wimborne Minster).    (York Minster).   (York Minster).\n                         Square Flower.\n                         Ball Flower.\n  Crocket                Cornice           Crockets\n (Hereford Cathedral).  (Grantham).       (York Minster).\n _Drawn by E. M. Heath._]\n\nAlmost every variety of leaf and flower is represented, the oak, the\nvine and the rose being perhaps the most common, but the leaves of the\nmaple, hazel, ivy and strawberry are all so beautifully rendered as to\nevidence their having been directly studied from nature. Plucked flowers\ntoo, are not uncommon, and sometimes the little stalks and foliage\nare accompanied by birds, lizards, squirrels and other creatures. The\ncolumns of this period are much more elaborate than those of the Early\nEnglish style, and in plan have curved profiles with moulded members\nbetween the shafts. These mouldings are very varied, but the hollows not\nbeing so deeply undercut, the general effect is broader and less liney\nthan in the Early English; while the Decorated arches are less sharply\npointed than in the previous style.\n\n [Side note: Decorated Doorways.]\n\nThe doorways of this style possess much the same features as the last,\nbut the mouldings, jamb shafts, etc., are more slender, and generally of\nfiner proportions, the hollows being often filled with the ball flower\nand square flower instead of the dog tooth. Sometimes the doorways have\nno pillars, being entirely composed of mouldings which are continuous\nwith those in the architrave. The large single doorways of this period\nare nearly as large as the double ones of Early English date, and on the\nsides small buttresses or niches are sometimes placed, and often one\nfinds a series of niches carried up like a hollow moulding, and filled\nwith figures. The figures of this period are not so good as in the\nprevious style, the heads seem too large for the bodies, and in the\nfemale figures the breasts are represented as quite flat. Where there\nare no figures double foliated tracery is often found hanging from one\nof the outer mouldings, giving an effect of great richness.\n\n [Side note: Decorated Buttresses.]\n\nThe buttresses (_see page 17_) in the Decorated style are nearly always\nworked in stages, and a niche frequently figures on the face of the\nbuttress. Crocketed canopies and other carved decorations are common,\nand in large buildings they usually terminate in pinnacles, which are\nsometimes of open work.\n\nA Gothic building attains its effect by the combination of numerous\nparts, each possessing an individual character of its own. In its\nloftiness, graceful outlines, and rich effect of light and shade, it\nspeaks of noble aspirations, of freedom, of intellectual thought,\nof talent and skill, all generously given for a high purpose, the\nfoundation of which was a strong religious enthusiasm, combined with\nan intense love of the work itself.\n\n [Side note: Characteristics of Gothic Architecture.]\n\nHaving now arrived at the point where Gothic architecture reached its\nclimax, we may briefly sum up its leading characteristics. It is\nessentially pointed or vertical; its details are mostly geometrical in\nits window traceries, clusters of shafts and bases, but this geometric\nquality is only one of construction and form and not of its inner spirit\nand motive, for plants copied directly from nature were used in\nbeautiful profusion.\n\nIf we compare a large Gothic church with a comparatively small one, we\nshall find the columns, windows, ornaments of the former are not so very\nmuch larger than those of the latter, but that there are double or three\ntimes the number of them. This is not the case in a classical building,\nwhere each feature has to be enlarged in proportion to the size of the\nbuilding. It is the constant sub-division of a Gothic Church which adds\nso to its apparent size.\n\nOrnamentally, the Gothic is the geometrical and pointed elements\nrepeated to their utmost and afterwards combined with the elaboration of\nnatural objects, plants, flowers, etc., growing in the neighbourhood of\nthe work. This is a great feature, but the most striking point in all\ngood Gothic work is the wonderful elaboration of geometric tracery,\nvesicas, trefoils, quatrefoils and an immense variety of other ornament.\n\nIn regard to the sizes of our great churches it may be of interest to\nnote that our longest English cathedral is Winchester. York and Lincoln,\nalthough not so long as Winchester, are in superficial area very much\nlarger. The largest English church of a non-cathedral rank is\nWestminster Abbey, which has, moreover, the distinction of being the\nloftiest internally; the nave being 104 ft. in height. The largest\nparish church is that of S. Nicholas, Great Yarmouth, which exceeds in\nsuperficial area no fewer than eight of our cathedrals.\n\n\n [Illustration: Examples of Perpendicular Ornament.\n     Panel.                        Crocket.\n  Tudor Rose.      Portcullis.   Fleur de Lys.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\nTHE PERPENDICULAR STYLE.\n\n\nTowards the close of the XIVth century a great change came over English\nGothic architecture, a change which was to a certain extent a return to\nclassical ideas. The curvilinear tracery gave place to a rigid vertical\nand horizontal form, with the result that windows and panels instead of\nbeing filled with curved bars of stone, were sub-divided by straight\nperpendicular bars and transoms or cross-bars.\n\nThis style of architecture is popularly known as Perpendicular, but as\nthe horizontal lines are quite as distinct a feature as are the vertical,\nit would perhaps be more correct to speak of it as Rectilinear. This\nchange in architectural form made its appearance towards the close of\nthe XIVth century, although it was by no means generally introduced at\nthat period, for the old methods and styles were carried on side by side\nwith the new for many years. For example, the eastern end of the choir\nof York Minster (1361-99) possesses a window the traceries of which\ncontain both curvilinear and rectilinear lines, while Shottesbrook\nChurch in Berkshire (1387), and Wimmington Church, Bedfordshire (1391)\nare examples of village churches neither of which has any feature of the\nPerpendicular style.\n\n [Illustration: Yeovil Parish Church (A.D. 1376).\n  Early Perpendicular in style, without a clerestory, and called,\n  for its large window area, the \"Lantern of the West.\"]\n\nIn its earlier stages the Perpendicular style presented an effect at\nonce good and bold; the mouldings, though not equal to the best of the\nDecorated style, were well defined, the enrichments effective, and the\ndetails delicate without extravagant minuteness. Subsequently the\nstyle underwent a gradual debasement; the arches became depressed; the\nmouldings impoverished, the details crowded and coarsely executed, and\nthe whole style became wanting in the chaste and elegant effects for\nwhich the Decorated stands unapproached and unapproachable. The flowing\ncontours and curved lines of the previous style now gave place in the\nwindows to mullions running straight up from the bottom to the top, and\ncrossed by transoms. As the arch became more and more depressed the\nmouldings became shallower and less effective. In early buildings of\nthis period the drop arch is very prevalent, but as the period advanced\na form known as the Tudor arch began to be used. It is an arch in which,\nas a rule, the centres of the upper portion lie immediately below those\nof the lower, but this is not always the case. Sometimes the whole of\nthe upper portion uniting the arcs of the ends is struck from one centre,\nin which case the arch becomes a three-centred one, being, in fact, half\nan ellipse. Towards the close of the style the curvature of the upper\nportion is so slight that it can hardly be distinguished from a straight\nline, and as the debasement progressed it became really straight. Ogee\narches are also found at this period, and foiled arches are very frequent.\nWhen the Tudor arch was not used, we generally find the low drop arch,\nthese three last being mostly used for small openings.\n\n [Illustration: A Fine Parish Church showing Rich Perpendicular Work.\n  Terrington St. Clement, Norfolk. _Photograph Dexter & Son._]\n\nThe peculiar characteristics of the windows--the perpendicular\nmullions and horizontal transoms--we have already alluded to.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Windows.]\n\nThe window heads, instead of being filled with flowing tracery, have\nslender mullions running from the heads of the lights between each\nmullion, and these again have smaller transoms, until the whole surface\nof the window becomes divided into a series of panels, the heads of\nwhich being arched, are trefoiled or cinquefoiled. In the later windows\nthe transoms at the top are often furnished with a small ornamental\nbattlement, causing the mullions to present a concave outline.\n\n [Illustration: A Perpendicular Doorway.\n  Merton College Chapel. _Drawn by E. M. Heath._]\n\nThe plans of churches in this style differ from all others in that they\nare more spacious, the columns more slender and wider apart, the windows\nmuch larger, and the walls loftier and thinner. Panelling is used most\nabundantly on walls, both internally and externally, and also on\nvaulting, while some buildings, as Henry the Seventh's Chapel at\nWestminster, are almost entirely covered with it. Fan tracery vaulting,\na feature peculiar to this style, is almost invariably covered with\npanelling.\n\nThe mouldings of this period are essentially different from those which\npreceded them. As a general rule they are cut on a slanting or chamfer\nplane, the groups of mouldings being separated by a shallow oval-shaped\nhollow, entirely different from those of the Decorated period.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Doorways.]\n\nThe doorways of the early portion of this period had two-centred arches,\nbut the characteristic form is the four-centred, enclosed in a square\nhead, formed by the outer mouldings with a hood mould of the same shape,\nthe spandrels being filled with quatrefoils, roses, shields, etc.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Capitals.]\n\nPerpendicular capitals are either circular or octagonal, but the necking\nis usually of the former shape, and the upper members of the abacus of\nthe latter form. The bell portion is mostly plain, but is often enriched\nwith foliage of a very conventional character, shallow and formal,\nwithout either the freedom or the boldness of the Early English, or the\nexquisite grace of the Decorated periods. A distinguishing feature in\nthe ornamentation of this period is that called panel-tracery, with\nwhich the walls and vaulted ceilings are covered. The patterns are found\nin a variety of forms, as circles, squares, quatrefoils, etc.\n\n [Side note: Fan Vaulting.]\n\nThe rich vaulting called fan vaulting previously alluded to, is composed\nof pendant curved semi-cones, covered with foliated panel-work, which\nbears some resemblance to a fan spread open.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Ornament.]\n\nAnother very characteristic ornament is the Tudor flower. It is formed\nby a series of flat leaves placed upright against the stalk. It was\nmuch used in late buildings as a crest or ornamental finishing to\ncornices, etc., to which it gave an embattled appearance. Cornices and\nbrackets were frequently ornamented with busts of winged angels called\nangel-brackets, and angel-corbels. The portcullis and the Tudor\nrose--both badges of the house of Tudor--also figure prominently among\nthe ornaments of the period. The crockets for the most part partake of\nthe squareness which pervades all the foliage of this style. _See page\n64._\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Buttresses.]\n\nThe buttresses are very similar to those preceding them in their plainer\nforms, but, in richer examples the faces are covered with panel work\nand are finished with square pinnacles sometimes set diagonally and\nterminated with a crocketed spire, or finished with an animal or other\nornament. Parapets with square battlements are very common at this period,\nbut they too are frequently panelled or pierced with tracery, or with\ntrefoils or quatrefoils inserted in square, circular or triangular\ncompartments.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Roofs.]\n\nThe roofs of this period, both in ecclesiastical and secular buildings,\nare very magnificent, and have the whole of the framing exposed to view;\nmany of them are of high pitch, the spaces between the timbers being\nfilled with tracery, and the beams arched, moulded and ornamented in\nvarious ways; and frequently pendants, figures of angels, and other\ncarvings are introduced. The flatter roofs are sometimes lined with\nboards and divided into panels by ribs, or have the timbers open, and\nall enriched with mouldings and carvings, as at Cirencester church,\nGloucestershire.\n\nThe gradual decline of the Gothic style is very evident in late\nPerpendicular churches, especially in those erected at the beginning\nof the XVIth century. The elements of Gothic architecture became much\ndegraded and led to that mixture of features called the Debased Gothic\nin which every real principle of art and of beauty was lost.\n\n [Illustration: A Perpendicular Porch.\n  S. Nicholas, King's Lynn. _Photograph Dexter & Son._]\n\nThe chief characteristics, then, of the Perpendicular style are the\nvertical mullions, and the general flattening of arches, mouldings and\ncarvings. Should there be no other guide, a Perpendicular church carries\nits style and period stamped upon its carvings. The plants represented\nare, almost without exception, the vine with or without grapes, and\nthe oak with or without acorns. The leaves are generally full blown and\ncrumpled. The earliest building showing the Perpendicular style is the\nbeautiful little priory church of Edington, in Wilts, erected by William\nEdington, Bishop of Winchester. The same style, but more fully developed,\nis seen in the nave of Winchester Cathedral, at New College, Oxford, and\nat Winchester College.\n\nIt is generally admitted that the Perpendicular style was, to a certain\nextent, a return to classical ideas, for Gothic architecture in its\naspiring grace and feeling for motion was becoming a little unsteady in\nconstruction, and although the movement was started by Bishop Edington,\nit was left to William of Wykeham to save our English Gothic architecture\nfrom developing into the flamboyant[1] style so characteristic of the\nlate Gothic buildings of France and Germany.\n\nIt is little less than astounding that William of Wykeham, at once Prime\nMinister, diplomatist, scholar and energetic churchman, should have found\ntime to introduce such far-reaching reforms into the art of building,\nand whatever his fame may be in other directions he will always be\nremembered by posterity as one of the most remarkable geniuses of the\nMiddle Ages, a man of giant mind and immense physical energy, who\ncarried into all his work a large and dignified character, stamping it\nwith the unmistakable personality of a master mind.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Towers.]\n\nAs builders and designers of church towers the masons of the\nPerpendicular era have never been approached, and all our finest English\ntowers are of this style and period.\n\n [Illustration: A Fine Perpendicular Tower.\n  St. Mary, Taunton. _Photograph H. Montague Cooper._]\n\nConsiderations of space will only allow a few of these towers to be\nmentioned, but among the finest are those at Boston, Lincolnshire;\nWrexham, Denbighshire; Wymondham, Heigham and S. Clement's in Norfolk;\nSouthwold Church in Suffolk; Manchester Cathedral, S. Nicholas' Church,\nNewcastle, and S. Mary's Church, Taunton. Of Perpendicular date and\nstyle, also, are the great lantern towers of Worcester, Bristol,\nGloucester, York and Durham Cathedrals, in addition to the fine\nbell-tower of Evesham Abbey.\n\n [Side note: Perpendicular Spires.]\n\nThe spire, although less commonly used than formerly, was by no means\nabandoned, and beautiful examples of Perpendicular spires are those at\nS. Michael's, Coventry, and Rotherham Church, Yorkshire. Although\nnearly all our cathedrals have some portion of their fabric in the\nPerpendicular style, chantries, chapels, cloisters, vaulting, screens,\netc., it was in our parochial churches that Perpendicular architecture\nreached its highest and finest development. Just as the XIIIth century\nwas the great age for cathedral building, so the latter end of the XIVth\nand earlier half of the XVth centuries was the period to which we owe\nsome of the most beautiful of our parish churches, as S. Michael's,\nCoventry (fin. 1395); S. Nicholas, Lynn (fin. 1400); Manchester\nCathedral (formerly a collegiate church), (1422); Fotheringay Church,\nNorthants (fin. 1435); Southwold Church, Suffolk (1440), and S. Mary\nRedcliffe, Bristol (about 1442). A little later came, among others,\nWakefield Church, Yorkshire (1470), S. Stephen's, Bristol (1470), S.\nMary's, Oxford, and its namesake at Cambridge (both in 1478) and Long\nMelford Church, Suffolk (1481).\n\nApart from the actual buildings the Perpendicular architects, masons and\nsculptors have left us some beautiful work in the form of timber roofs,\nscreens, stalls and seats. Among the more notable roofs of this period\nare those at S. Peter's, S. Andrew's and S. Mary's, Norwich, the one at\nMorton Church in Somerset, those at Saffron Walden and Thaxted, Essex,\nand a particularly fine one at S. David's Cathedral in Wales. Among the\nremarkable domestic roofs in this style are those at Westminster Hall\nand Eltham Palace.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\nTHE RENAISSANCE AND LATER.\n\n\nSo far we have been considering Gothic churches, but we now come to the\ntime when, from a variety of causes, the Italian architects, among them\nPalladio and Vitruvius, began to revive classical architecture, a\nmovement which gradually spread over other parts of Europe.\n\n [Side note: The Classic Revival.]\n\nThe various causes which led to this apparently retrograde movement are\nstill involved in considerable obscurity. The commercial prosperity of\nthe age produced a class who travelled abroad and cultivated the fine\narts, with the result that they desired to see erected in England\nbuildings such as they had seen in Rome, Florence, Genoa and Padua. It\nis generally admitted that the ramifications of Gothic architecture had\nreached their utmost limit, and the style was getting out of hand, as\nis seen by the flamboyant buildings on the continent. The revival of\nclassical literature in western Europe gave an impetus to the movement\nwhich was largely intended to enfold art within the shelter of an\nenlightened taste, and protect it from the licence of unordered\nenthusiasm. How far it succeeded is not a question that can be discussed\nat length here, but, however good their intentions may have been, the\narchitects used little discrimination in the selection of buildings\nwhich were to serve as models for Christian churches, and although\nsubsequently considerable improvements were made, yet, most of the\ndefects in the pagan buildings of the ancients were retained in such as\nwere intended to be utilized for Christian worship, and even considered\npurely as exercises in architecture it was not until the more chaste\nremains of antiquity began to be studied that the spirit and harmony of\nthe good examples were attained. A greater contrast than the methods\nemployed by the Gothic mason and the Renaissance architect could not\nwell be imagined. The former shaped his material with his own hands; the\nfoster mother of his art was tradition and its cradle the craftsman's\nbench; whereas the latter, with no builder's training, worked out his\nflawless and precise plans in the exotic atmosphere of the office and\nthe study. The practice of making working drawings for every detail\nof the building was the cause of the decline of ornamental sculpture,\nwith the result that all life and growth in the building ceased. Some\nauthorities are very severe on the Renaissance movement. Dr. Fergusson,\nin his \"_Modern Styles of Architecture_,\" says: \"During the Gothic era\nthe art of building was evolved by the simple exercise of man's reason,\nwith the result that the work of this period is the instinctive natural\ngrowth of man's mind. The buildings, on the other hand, which were\ndesigned in the imitative styles, and produced on a totally different\nprinciple, present us with an entirely different result, and one\nwhich frequently degrades architecture from its high position of a\nquasi-natural production to that of a mere imitative art.\"\n\n [Side note: Inigo Jones and Wren.]\n\nBe this as it may, the severe classical style introduced into England by\nInigo Jones (who studied in Italy under Palladio), and continued by Sir\nChristopher Wren, soon swept everything before it.\n\nOur most remarkable church in this style is S. Paul's Cathedral, which\nin style has two very adverse circumstances to struggle against. In the\nfirst place, it bears so great a similarity to the great church of\nS. Peter, at Rome, that one cannot help comparing it with that fine\nexample, and secondly, it is the only English cathedral which is not in\nthe Gothic style. It must, of course, be acknowledged that S. Paul's\nfalls far short of S. Peter's, especially in its lighting, but it does\nnot deserve the condemnation of a great German critic, who said, \"It is\na building marked neither by elegance of form nor vigour of style.\"\nAlthough the interior of its dome and clerestory of the nave and choir\nare extremely gloomy when compared with those of S. Peter's, the church\nis generally acknowledged to be far superior to the latter in its\narchitectural details, and few, if any, Italian churches can be said to\nsurpass it, either in general composition or external effect, although\nit must be admitted that everything having been sacrificed to attain the\nlatter quality, S. Paul's taken as a whole, is neither worthy of its\nfine situation nor of its great architect.\n\nOther churches which are excellent examples of this style are S.\nStephen's, Walbrook, and S. Mary Abchurch, London. Both show remarkable\nskill. The former is divided into a nave and four aisles, transepts, and\na shallow chancel, by four rows of Corinthian columns, with a small dome\nover the intersection. The interior is very beautiful, and this church\nis generally considered to be Wren's masterpiece. S. Mary Abchurch, is\nnearly square in plan, has no columns and is covered with a domical\nceiling, but so skilfully treated that the effect is singularly\npleasing.\n\n [Side note: Hawkesmore.]\n\nOf the Elizabethan and Jacobean buildings it is necessary to say little,\nas at best they are but clumsy imitations of the Flemish, French and\nItalian Renaissance, while the style which we now call Queen Anne came\nin towards the close of the XVIIth century, and belongs of right to the\nreign of Charles II. Hawkesmore, a pupil and follower of Wren, was a\nstrong architect who has left us Christ Church, Spitalfields, and S.\nMary Woolnoth. He also designed the western towers of Westminster Abbey,\noften wrongly ascribed to Wren, and the second quadrangle of All Souls'\nCollege, Oxford. This architect, like the majority of his contemporaries,\nmisunderstood and despised the Gothic style, with which he had little\nreal sympathy; he drew out designs, which still exist, for converting\nWestminster Abbey into an Italian church, just as Inigo Jones had done\nwith the exterior of the nave of old S. Paul's, but we cannot be too\nthankful that this abominable suggestion was never carried out.\n\n [Illustration: An English Renaissance Church.\n  S. Stephen's, Walbrook, London. Generally considered to be\n  Sir Christopher Wren's masterpiece. _From an Engraving dated 1806._]\n\nWith King George III. on the throne our ancestors contented themselves\nwith dull, but substantial, buildings of which some hard things have\nbeen written, but they were at least respectable and free from sham,\nwhile the churches, although not elegant, were well-built and occasionally\npicturesque, as we see by the perfect little building of this date at\nBillesley, Warwickshire.\n\nThe eighteenth century pseudo-classical abominations and sham Gothic, so\nfavoured by Horace Walpole and his admirers, can be briefly dismissed.\nA more rampant piece of absurdity than that of erecting imitations of\nportions of Greek temples and adapting them for Christian worship it\nis difficult to imagine, and in the Pavilion at Brighton, Marylebone\nChurch, and the \"Extinguisher\" Church in Langham Place we even surpassed\nin bad taste and vulgarity all the absurdities of the Continental\narchitecture produced by the French Revolution.\n\n [Side note: Barry and Pugin.]\n\nTwo men now came on the scene who, united, were destined to bring some\nkind of order out of this chaos. Barry and Pugin were both scholars and\narchitects, for while the former rather favoured the classical style he\nthoroughly understood the Gothic, while Pugin was a thorough medi\u00e6valist,\na true artist, and a bold exponent in his \"_Contrasts_\" of a complete\nreturn to medi\u00e6val architecture as the only possible cure for the evils\nwhich had crept into the art of building.\n\nBarry's idea, which was perhaps the more practical, was to correct by\ncareful study the errors into which the later exponents of both Classic\nand Gothic architecture had fallen, and endeavour by well thought out\nmodifications to evolve a style more suitable to modern requirements.\nPugin, however, would have none of the evil thing, and although he\nsupplied his friend with designs for the details and woodwork of the\nHouses of Parliament which Barry was rebuilding, they did not collaborate\nin any further way, and both died before the Houses of Parliament\nwere completed, in which, as a matter of fact, Barry's designs were\ncompletely ignored. The Reform Club is considered to be the best of\nBarry's classical buildings.\n\nPugin's earlier works were mostly Roman Catholic churches, and they are\nacknowledged to be an immense advance on any Gothic work which had been\nseen for centuries. In the Roman Catholic Cathedral of S. Chad, at\nBirmingham, there is a dignity, loftiness and simplicity surpassed by\nfew Gothic buildings when that style was at its zenith, and from the\ntime Pugin designed this building, architecture--notwithstanding our\nexhaustive study of arch\u00e6ology, our immense resources of capital and\nlabour, our science and labour-saving appliances, and the comparative\naccessibility of the finest materials--has neither developed nor advanced.\nThe most erudite Gothic mason could have possessed but little art\nknowledge as compared with the modern architect, and yet with our\nlearned societies, wonderful libraries, easily obtained photographs and\nplans of the best buildings in the world; with writers far superior in\nintellectual acquirements to those of the Middle Ages, our vast wealth,\nwith our tools such as the medi\u00e6val craftsman could never have dreamed\nof, and with the experience of twenty centuries to guide us we have\nmade no advance during more than half a century. Our best architects\nacknowledge that until we get a new method of building, originality in\narchitecture is an impossibility, mainly because all the existing styles\nof architecture have been worked out to their legitimate conclusion,\nand have been perfected under circumstances and conditions with which\nwe have entirely broken; the originality in detail which pervades and\npermeates our Gothic buildings and gives them the greater part of their\ncharm, must, of necessity, be out of our reach until we blend the spirit\nof what we are pleased to call our practical age, with a certain amount\nof that spirit of poetry and romance, religious fervour and devoutness,\nwhich animated the builders and craftsmen of the past.\n\n\n [Illustration: A Typical Cornish Font.\n  Probably of the late Norman period. Now at Maker, near Plymouth.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\nCHURCH FURNITURE AND ORNAMENTS.\n\n\nThe most important part of the internal furniture of a church is the\naltar, a name derived from the Latin _altare_, a high place. The altar\nis a raised structure on which propitiatory offerings are placed. In the\nChristian church the altar is a table or slab on which the instruments\nof the Eucharist are displayed.\n\n [Side note: The Altar.]\n\nThe early Christian altars were portable structures of wood, and the\nChurch of Rome still allows the use of an altar of this description,\nalthough a consecrated stone, containing an authentic relic and regarded\nas the true altar, must be placed upon the wooden table. The slab\nforming the altar was sometimes supported on pillars, but more\nfrequently on solid masonry, and previous to the Reformation it was\nmarked with five crosses cut into the top, in allusion to the five\nwounds of Christ. From the period that stone altars were introduced it\nwas usual to enclose within them the relics of saints, so that in some\ncases they were the actual tombs of saints. In England the altars were\ngenerally taken down about the year 1550, set up again in the beginning\nof the reign of Queen Mary, and again removed in the second year of\nQueen Elizabeth. In the church of Porlock, Somerset, the original high\naltar has been preserved, though not in use, being placed against the\nnorth wall of the chancel. In Dunster Church, in the same county, there\nis a solid stone altar, said to have been the original high altar, and\nin the ruined church of S. Mary Magdalene at Ripon, the high altar has\nescaped destruction. Of chantry altars we have several left, including\nthose at Abbey Dore, Herefordshire; Grosmont, Monmouthshire; Chipping\nNorton, Oxon.; Warmington, Warwick; S. Giles's, Oxford; Lincoln\nCathedral, and many others; and it is rare to find a Gothic church\nwithout some traces of altars in their various chapels, oratories or\nchantries.\n\nThe altar is, of course, an adoption by the Christian church of a pagan\naid to worship, and at S. Mary's church, Wareham, which is thought to\nstand on the site of a Roman temple, are some pieces of stone considered\nby antiquaries to be portions of a pagan altar, on which burnt offerings\nwere placed.\n\nAbove many Christian altars was placed a piece of sculpture or a\npainting representing some religious subject. These altar pieces\nsometimes consist of two pictures, when they are called \"diptyches,\" and\nsometimes of three pictures, when they are called \"triptyches,\" and\nboth forms usually fold up or are provided with shutters. They are often\nrare examples of the Flemish and other schools of painting, and of great\nvalue.\n\nAt the Reformation the stone altar was displaced by the communion table,\nwhich at first occupied the position vacated by the altar. This gave\numbrage to the Puritan mind, and the communion table was then usually\nplaced in the centre of the chancel, with seats all round for the\ncommunicants; which arrangement is still in vogue in some of our English\nchurches and in Jersey, although at the Restoration the communion table\nwas, as a general rule, replaced at the eastern wall of the Chancel.\n\n [Illustration: _Durham Sanctuary Knocker._]\n\nLong before the Christian era the altar was regarded as a place of\nrefuge for those fleeing from justice or oppression, and this custom or\nprivilege of sanctuary was sanctioned by the English bishops and was\nretained for many centuries by the Christian Church. Many of our parish\nchurches claim to possess old sanctuary rings or knockers, but it is\ndoubtful if any of these were ever used by fugitives, for the reason\nthat although in early days every parish church had the right to grant\nsanctuary, few possessed the means of feeding and housing a refugee,\nsave in the church itself, which was expressly forbidden. This is why\nwe find records of fugitives travelling many miles at the risk of their\nlives and passing hundreds of parish churches in their endeavour to reach\nBury St. Edmunds, Hexham, Durham or some other of the well-recognised\nsanctuaries. The only sanctuary knocker remaining to-day, which is\nabove suspicion, is that at Durham Cathedral. It is made of bronze and\nrepresents the grotesque head of a dragon, the ring coming from the\nmouth.\n\n [Illustration: The Baptistery in Luton Church.\n _Photograph Fredk. Thurston, F.R.P.S._]\n\nAbove the door is a small room in which attendants watched by\nday and night, and when a fugitive was admitted a bell was rung to\nannounce that someone had taken sanctuary.\n\n [Side note: The Font.]\n\nThe font, as we have seen, was originally placed in a separate building\ncalled the baptistery. The only known example of anything of the kind\nin England is that in S. Mary's Church, Luton, fully described in The\nHomeland Handbook, No. 47. It is in the Decorated style, dates from the\ntime of Edward III., and is said to have been designed by William of\nWykeham for Queen Philippa. It is composed of white stone with open\npanels, pierced by cinquefoils and quatrefoils, while the apex of each\npanel terminates in a foliated finial. The font inside is octagonal\nin form and of 13th century date, but it has been somewhat restored.\nAncient fonts were always large enough to allow for total immersion,\nand our present custom of baptism by affusion, or sprinkling, is only\npermitted, not enjoined by the rubric. In early days the sacrament of\nbaptism was only administered by the bishops at the great festivals of\nPentecost and Easter, for the reason that this afforded the greater\nconvenience for immediate confirmation, but with the increase in the\nnumber of churches the rite was administered by the priests in every\nvillage. The font was required by the canon to be of stone, but there\nare a few Norman fonts made of lead, among them those at S. Mary's\nChurch, Wareham, Walton-on-the-Hill, Surrey, and at Edburton, Parham,\nand Pyecombe, Sussex. A remarkable font is that at Dolton Church, Devon,\nmade up of fragments of the churchyard cross, and there is also a\nsomewhat similar one at Melbury Bubb, Dorset. By a constitution of\nEdmund, Archbishop of Canterbury (1236), fonts were required to be\ncovered and locked, and at first these covers were little more than\nplain lids, but they afterwards became highly ornamental and were\nenriched with buttresses, pinnacles, crockets, etc. It is doubtful if\nany fonts exist which can reasonably be supposed to be Saxon, although\na few, like that at Little Billing, Northants, may possibly be of that\nera. Of Norman fonts we have large numbers. They are sometimes plain\nhollow cylinders; others are massive squares with a large pillar in\nthe centre, and small shafts at the corners. These fonts are generally\nornamented with rudely executed carvings, consisting of foliage and\ngrotesque animals.\n\n\n [Illustration: An Example of a Leaden Font of the late Norman period.\n  Walton-on-the-Hill, Surrey.]\n\nThe one in Winchester Cathedral is a good example, and there are three\nother very similar ones in Hampshire. Early English fonts are very often\ncircular, and sometimes square, and they are often supported in much the\nsame way as the Norman ones. In the Decorated and Perpendicular styles\nthey are, with few exceptions, octagonal, and the details generally\npartake of the character of those used in the other architectural features\nof the period. There are hexagonal fonts of Decorated date at Rolvenden,\nKent, and Heckington, Lincs. The font is usually placed close to a pillar\nnear the entrance, generally that nearest but one to the tower in the\nsouth arcade, or, in larger buildings, in the middle of the nave.\n\n [Side note: Stoups.]\n\nThe holy-water stoups sometimes found in our old churches are generally\nsmall niches with stone basins formed in the wall either in or just\noutside the porch, or within the church close to the door, or in one of\nthe pillars nearest to the door. These niches resemble piscinas, except\nthat they differ in situation, are smaller and plainer, and rarely have\na drain. A good example of an outside stoup is that at Broadmayne,\nDorset, where there is also one inside the church. They are rarely found\nunmutilated, but there is one in perfect condition in the north porch of\nThornham Church, Kent; and a rather elaborate example at Pylle Church,\nnear Glastonbury.\n\n [Illustration: A Reputed Saxon Font. Shaldon, Devon.]\n\nThe piscina is a water-drain formerly placed near the altar and\nconsisting of a shallow stone basin, or sink, with a drain to carry off\nwhatever is poured into it.\n\n [Side note: Piscinas.]\n\nIt was used to receive the water in which the priest washed his hands,\nas well as for that with which the chalice was rinsed at the celebration\nof the mass. It was usually placed within a niche, although the basin\noften projects from the face of the wall, and is sometimes supported\non a shaft rising from the floor. In the Early English and Decorated\nperiods there are often two basins and two drains, and occasionally\nthree. Within the niche a wooden or stone shelf is often found, called\na credence-table, on which the sacred vessels were placed previous to\ntheir being required at the altar.\n\n [Illustration: A Detached Holy-water Stoup of unusual design.\n  Wooton Courtenay, Som.]\n\nPiscinas are unknown in England of earlier date than the middle of the\n12th century, and of that date they are extremely rare. Of thirteenth\nand succeeding centuries we have many examples, more or less mutilated.\nTheir forms and decorations are very various, but the character of their\narchitectural features will always decide their approximate date.\n\n [Side note: Sedilia.]\n\nThe Sedilia, from the Latin _sedile_, a seat, has come to be applied in\nmodern times to the seats used by the celebrants during the pauses in\nthe mass. They were sometimes moveable, but more usually in this country\nwere formed of masonry and recessed in the wall. They are generally three\nin number, for the priest, deacon and sub-deacon, while in a few rare\ninstances they number four seats, as at Rothwell Church, Northants, and\nFurness Abbey; or even five, as at Southwell Minster. Sometimes a long\nsingle seat under one arch is found, and when three seats are used the\ntwo western ones are often on the same level and the eastern one raised\nabove them. Numerous examples remain in our churches, some being as\nearly as the latter part of the 12th century, but they are mostly later\nand extend to the end of the Perpendicular style. Some of them are\nseparated by shafts, and profusely ornamented with panelling, niches,\nstatues, pinnacles, tabernacle work, and crowned with canopies all more\nor less elaborately enriched.\n\n [Side note: Stalls.]\n\nStalls are fixed seats in the choir, either wholly or partially enclosed\nand used by the clergy. Previous to the Reformation all large and many\nsmall churches had a range of wooden stalls on each side and at the west\nend of the choir. In cathedrals they were enclosed at the back with\npanelling, and surmounted by overhanging canopies of tabernacle work,\ngenerally of oak, of which those at Winchester, Henry VII.'s Chapel at\nWestminster, and Manchester Cathedral are possibly our finest examples.\nWhen the stalls occupied both sides of the choir, return seats were\nplaced at the ends for the prior, dean, precentor, and other of the\nofficiating clergy.\n\n [Illustration: Sedilia and Chantry. Luton, Beds.\n _Photograph Fredk. Thurston, F.R.P.S._]\n\nMr. Parker, in his \"_Glossary of Architecture_,\" gives the following\ndefinition of the miserere, patience or pretella. \"The projecting bracket\non the underside of the seats of stalls in churches; these, when perfect,\nare fixed with hinges so they may be turned up, and when this is done the\nprojection of the miserere is sufficient, without actually forming a\nseat, to afford very considerable rest to anyone leaning upon it. They\nwere allowed as a relief to the infirm during the long services that\nwere required to be performed by ecclesiastics in a standing posture.\"\nIt is in the carving of these that one is frequently struck by the\ncurious mixture of the sacred and the profane, the refined and the\nvulgar, for which it is difficult to find any adequate explanation. Of\nso coarse a nature are some of these carvings that it has been necessary\nto entirely remove them from the stalls. They are usually attributed to\nthe mendicant and wandering monks, and they undoubtedly reflect the\nlicentiousness which at one time pervaded the monastic and conventual\nestablishments. Among our best examples are those at Christchurch\nPriory, Hants, and in Henry VII.'s Chapel. There is a remarkably\ncomplete set in Exeter Cathedral.\n\n [Illustration: A Typical Somerset Bench-End.\n  Showing a Fuller at work with the implements of his trade. Spaxton.\n _Photograph Mr. Page._]\n\nOf modern pews it is not necessary to say anything here, but previous\nto the Reformation the nave of a church was usually fitted with fixed\nseats, parted from each other by wainscoting, and partially enclosed at\nthe ends by framed panelling, but more often by solid pieces of wood,\neither panelled or carved on the front. These bench-ends are very common\nin the West of England, in Somerset and Devon, and they are often very\nbeautiful pieces of work and were in all probability executed by local\ncraftsmen. They embrace a variety of subjects: figures, scrolls, dragons,\nserpents, etc., and frequently bear the arms of the family who owned the\npew. Sometimes they terminate at the top with finials either in the form\nof heads, bunches of foliage, a chamfered _fleur-de-lys_ and a variety\nof other ornaments called Poppy-heads, from the French _Poup\u00e9e_. No\nexamples are known to exist earlier than the Decorated style, but of\nPerpendicular date specimens are very numerous, especially in our\ncathedrals and old abbey churches.\n\n [Side note: Pulpits.]\n\nPulpits were formerly placed, not only in churches, but in the\nrefectories and occasionally in the cloisters of monasteries, and there\nis one in the outer court of Magdalen College, Oxford, and another at\nShrewsbury. In former times pulpits were placed in the nave attached\nto a wall, pillar or screen, usually against the second pier from the\nchancel arch. Some are of wood, others of stone; the former are mostly\npolygonal, with the panels enriched with foliation or tracery. Few exist\nof earlier date than the Perpendicular style, but stone pulpits of\nDecorated date are sometimes met with as at Beaulieu, Hants, a very\nearly specimen. Wooden pulpits are usually hexagonal or octagonal; some\nstand on slender wooden stems, others on stone bases. A few have canopies\nor sounding boards, and their dates can be fixed by the character of\ntheir ornamentation. At Kenton, Devon, there is an early pulpit which\nhas retained its original paintings. Jacobean pulpits are very numerous,\nand are frequently gilded and painted; the one at S. Saviour's Church,\nDartmouth, being a most elaborate example.\n\n [Illustration: A Richly Carved Pulpit and Canopy.\n  Edlesborough, Bucks. _Photograph H. A. Strange._]\n\nOpen-air preaching is anything but a modern invention, for long before\nthe erection of parish churches it was the recognised method of addressing\nthe people. There is a print of some popular bishop preaching in a\npulpit at Paul's Cross in S. Paul's Churchyard, and in medi\u00e6val days\nopen-air pulpits were erected near the roads, on bridges and often on\nthe steps of the market crosses, which are often still known as\npreaching crosses.\n\n [Side note: Squints.]\n\nIn some of our churches is to be seen a squint, an opening in an oblique\ndirection through a wall or pier for the purpose of enabling persons in\nthe aisles or transepts to see the elevation of the Host at the high\naltar. They are of frequent occurrence in our churches and are very\nnumerous in the neighbourhood of Tenby, South Wales, also in Devon and\nthe West generally. They are usually without any ornament, but are\nsometimes arched and enriched with tracery. They are mostly found on one\nor both sides of the chancel arch, but they sometimes occur in rooms\nabove porches, in side-chapels and the like; in every instance they were\nso situated that the altar could be seen. When they occur in porches or\nthe rooms above they are thought to have been for the use of the acolyte\nappointed to ring the sanctus bell, who, viewing the performance of mass,\nwould be thus able to sound the bell at the proper time. The name\nhagioscope has been used to describe these oblique openings.\n\nCruciform marks are sometimes found on our churches, often on a stone in\nthe porch; they are usually incised crosses or five dots in the form of\na cross. They were, presumably, cut by the bishop when the building was\nconsecrated, and are called consecration crosses.\n\n [Side note: Screens.]\n\nThe rood-screens, separating the chancel or choir of a church from the\nnave, usually supported the great Rood or Crucifix, not actually on the\nscreen itself, but on a beam called the rood-beam, or by a gallery\ncalled the rood-loft, which last was approached from the inside of the\nchurch, by a small stone staircase in the wall, as can be seen in many\nof our churches to-day. Although rood-lofts have been generally destroyed\nin England, some beautiful examples remain at Long Sutton, Barnwell,\nDunster and Minehead, Somerset; Kemsing, Kent; Newark, Nottingham;\nUffendon, Collumpton, Dartmouth, Kenton, Plymtree and Hartland, Devon.\nThe general construction of wooden screens is close panelling below,\nfrom which rise tall slender balusters, or wooden mullions supporting\ntracery rich with cornices and crestings, frequently painted and gilded.\nThe lower panels often depict saints and martyrs. From the top of the\nscreen certain parts of the services and the lessons were read. They\nwere occasionally close together and glazed, as we see by a most beautiful\nexample at Charlton-on-Otmoor, in Oxfordshire. These screens, many of\nwhich have been over-restored, are very common, and in addition to those\nabove mentioned, are found at S. Mary's, Stamford, Ottery S. Mary,\nChudleigh, Bovey, and in nearly all the Devon parish churches. At\nDunstable a screen of Queen Mary's time separates the vestry from the\nchancel.\n\n [Illustration: Screen with Rood Loft.\n  Kenton, Devon. _Photograph by Chapman._]\n\nOf stone screens space will permit of only the briefest mention. They\nwere used in various situations, to enclose tombs and to separate\nchapels, and occasionally the rood-screen was of stone.\n\n [Illustration: The Carved Oak Balustrade in Compton Church.\n  Held to be the oldest existing piece of carved woodwork in England.]\n\nThe oldest piece of screen work in this country is that at Compton\nChurch, Surrey; it is of wood and shows the transition from the Norman\nto the Early English styles. Stone screens are often massive structures\nenriched with niches, statues, tabernacles, pinnacles, crestings, etc.,\nas those at Canterbury, York and Gloucester.\n\n [Side note: The Reredos.]\n\nThe reredos forms no part of the altar, and is often highly enriched\nwith niches, buttresses, pinnacles, and other ornaments. Not infrequently\nit extends across the whole breadth of the church, and is sometimes\ncarried nearly up to the roof, as at S. Alban's Abbey, Durham and\nGloucester Cathedrals, S. Saviour's, Southwark and in that remarkably\nfine example at Christchurch, Hants. In village churches they are mostly\nvery simple, and generally have no ornaments formed in the wall, though\nniches and corbels are sometimes provided to carry images, and that part\nof the wall immediately over the altar is panelled, as at S. Michael's,\nOxford; Solihull, Warwickshire; Euston and Hanwell, Oxfordshire, etc.\n\nIt is interesting to note that the open fire-hearth, once used in\ndomestic halls, was also called a \"reredos.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\nBELLS AND BELFRIES.\n\n\nThe history of bells is lost in antiquity, and little is known about\nthem previous to the XVth century. It is probable, however, that they\nwere used in India and China centuries before they reached Europe.\n\nBells were used by the Romans for many secular purposes, and although\ntheir use was sanctioned by the Christian Church about 400 A.D., they\nwere not in general use in England until 650 A.D.\n\nThe earliest bells were hand bells, quadrangular in shape, and made of\nthin plates of copper or iron riveted together, and their abominable\nsound when struck must have been one of their chief merits, as the early\nbells were much used for the purpose of frightening the devil and other\nevil spirits.\n\nOur oldest bells are hand bells, S. Patrick's bell at Belfast (1091) and\nS. Ninian's bell at Edinburgh, which is probably of even earlier date.\nFrom 1550 to 1750 was the golden age of production for bells, more\nespecially so in Belgium and the Low Countries, where the bells of the\ntowers and belfries were rung to arouse the country in times of danger\nand invasion. It is quite possible that the bells used for secular and\nreligious purposes were kept distinct. Bells played a very important\npart in medi\u00e6val life, and next to cannon were regarded as the chief\ncity guardians, for he who held the bells held the town, and the first\nthing done by the invader on taking a town was to melt the bells and\nthus destroy the means of communicating an alarm.\n\nIn England our old towns, being almost entirely constructed of wood,\nwere liable to periodic and devastating conflagrations, which fact\nsuggested to that genius, William the Conqueror, the institution of\nCouvre-feu, or in its more popular form, Curfew, which rang at eight\no'clock in the evening, when all lights were to be extinguished. The\nringing of curfew has survived in many of our towns and villages to this\nday, but it is doubtful if the custom has been continuous from its first\ninstitution.\n\nThe secular use of the bell is, however, only incidental, and it is in\nits connection with religious life that we are now concerned, for all\nchurch history, church doctrine and church custom and observances are\nset to bell music. Bells in fact may be said to sum up the short span of\nour mortal life, for the birthday, the wedding and the funeral, are all\nwelded to religion by the church bell.\n\nBells were used for ecclesiastical purposes in England long before the\nerection of our parish churches, for Bede, speaking of the death of S.\nHilda, A.D. 680, says that \"one of the sisters in the distant monastery\nof Hackness, thought she heard as she slept, the sound of the bell which\ncalled them to prayers,\" and Turketul gave to Croyland Abbey a great\nbell called Guthlac, and afterwards six others which he called Bartholomew\nand Betelin, Turketul and Tatwin, and Pega and Bega.\n\nS. Dunstan gave bells to many of the churches in Somerset, and he also\nseems to have introduced bell ringing into the monasteries.\n\nA few words may be of interest concerning the number and purposes of\nthese monastic bells, with which the life of the monks must have been\ncompletely bound up. The _Signum_ woke up the whole community at\nday-break. The _Squilla_ announced the frugal meal in the refectory; but\nfor those working in the gardens, the cloister-bell, or _Campanella_,\nwas rung. The abbot's _Cordon_, or handbell, summoned the brothers and\nnovices to their Superior; whilst the _Petasius_ was used to call in\nthose working at a distance from the main building. At bed-time the\n_Tiniolum_ was sounded, and the _Noctula_ was rung at intervals throughout\nthe night to call the monks to watch and pray. The _Corrigiumcula_ was\nthe scourging bell, while the sweet-toned _Nota_, a choir bell, was rung\nat the consecration of the elements.\n\nThe use of the bell-tower was recognised in the ancient Saxon law, which\ngave the title of thane to anyone who had a church with a bell-tower on\nhis estate, and two of our most interesting Saxon churches, Brixworth\nand Brigstock, both in Northamptonshire, have each a semi-circular tower\nrising together with the bell-tower, and forming a staircase to it.\n\nOne of the most beautiful campaniles or bell-towers still standing\nis that at Evesham, in Worcestershire, which is a good specimen of\nPerpendicular architecture. It was built by Abbot Lichfield, the last\nabbot but one of the abbey, and took six years in building, and was not\nquite completed when the famous abbey, of which it was a final ornament,\nwas pulled down.\n\nIn addition to this example at Evesham, detached bell-towers exist, or\nonce existed, at Chichester, East Dereham, Glastonbury Abbey, Bruton, in\nSomerset, and in several other places.\n\nMarkland, in his _Remarks on Churches_, says: \"The great bell-tower\nwhich once formed part of the abbey church of S. Edmundsbury was\ncommenced about 1436. From the year 1441 to 1500 legacies were still\nbeing given towards the building. In 1461 an individual, probably a\nbenefactor, desired to be buried _in magno ostio novi campanilis_.\"\n\nIn Protestant use church bells have been stripped of much of the former\nsuperstition and symbolism. They are no longer rung to announce the\nmiracle of transubstantiation; neither are they called upon as of old\nfor the purpose of scaring devils, demons, and other evil spirits which\nformed so prominent a feature in the faith of the early Christian\ncommunities.\n\n [Illustration: Bell Turret for 3 Bells. Radipole, Dorset.]\n\nClosely connected with the subject of bells and belfries are the\nbell-gables or bell-turrets, so frequently found at the west ends of\nour smaller churches which have no towers. They usually contain but one\nbell, but are sometimes found with two, and at Radipole Church, near\nWeymouth, the bell-turret was originally designed to carry three bells.\nThey are generally most picturesque little features of which a few may\nbe of Norman date, but by far the greater number of them are Early\nEnglish, a style in which they are frequently found. In addition to\nthese bell-turrets at the western ends of our churches one sometimes\nfinds a similar, but smaller, erection at the eastern end of the roof of\nthe nave, but used for a very different purpose, for while the bell at\nthe western end was rung to summon the parishioners to service, that at\nthe eastern end, known as the Sanctus or Mass-bell, was rung on the\nelevation of the Host during the celebration of mass; although usually\nplaced on the apex of the roof, this bell sometimes occupied a position\nin the lantern or tower, or in a turret of larger dimensions. In churches\nwhere no turret existed it was carried in the hand, and such is now the\nprevailing practice on the continent. The turret for the Sanctus bell\nstill exists at Barnstaple, Devon, and St. Peter Port, Guernsey. The\nSanctus bell was generally made of silver, and occasionally a number of\nlittle bells were hung in the middle of the church, and by means of a\nwheel they were all made to ring at once.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\nTHE SPIRE; ITS ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT.\n\n\nProbably the most beautiful feature of a Gothic church is the spire,\nraising its tapering form far above the town or village and forming a\nprominent landmark, denoting the location of the House of God. Although\nfound occasionally in other styles, the spire is essentially Gothic, and\none of the most marked characteristics of this period. Spires are\ngenerally of two kinds, those constructed of timber and covered with\nslates, lead, tiles or shingles, and those built of stone or brick.\nExamples of both kinds are very numerous on the continent and in\nEngland, while shingle spires are especially common in Sussex.\n\nThe spire is generally acknowledged to have originated from the small\npyramidal roof so frequently found on Saxon and Norman towers. This\ngradually became elongated, and the towers were sometimes gabled on each\nside, as is the case with the remarkable Saxon church at Sompting, Sussex.\nThis shows us very clearly the angles of the spire resting upon the apex\nof each gable, so that the spire itself is set obliquely to the square\nof the tower.\n\n [Illustration: The best example of a Saxon Spire or Pyramidal Roof.\n  Sompting, Sussex. _Drawn by George Pearl._]\n\nSaxon and Norman spires are very rare in England, Sompting being our\nbest example of the former and those on the eastern transepts of\nCanterbury Cathedral of the latter.\n\nOf Early English spires we have, fortunately, some good examples, among\nwhich are those at Oxford Cathedral, Wilford and Wansted, in the same\ncounty, and a very graceful one at Leighton Buzzard. These 13th century\nspires are very common in France, as at Chartres and S. Pierre, Caen.\n\n [Illustration: Leighton Buzzard Church.\n  With Early English Tower and Spire. _Photograph H. A. Strange._]\n\nOf fourteenth century, or Decorated, spires, we have many examples, of\nwhich perhaps the best is the beautiful spire of Salisbury Cathedral,\nalthough the equally fine one at S. Mary's, Oxford, runs it close for\npremier position. The triple group at Lichfield Cathedral belong to this\nperiod, as do the spires of Ross, Heckington, Grantham, S. Mary's,\nNewark, King's Sutton, Bloxham and Snettisham, Norfolk. A peculiarity of\nthe Salisbury spire is that it never formed part of the original design\nof the cathedral, being added seventy years later. It is the loftiest\nspire in England--404 feet--about 40 ft. higher than the cross of\nS. Paul's. It speaks well for the Gothic builders that such a vast\nsuperstructure as this tower and spire could be imposed upon walls and\npiers never intended to bear it. At an early period it was found to have\ndeflected twenty-three inches from the perpendicular, but there has been\nno sign of any further movement. Barnack Church, in Northamptonshire,\nhas a curious spire showing the transition from Norman to Early English.\n\nIt will be noticed that the sides of a church spire are slightly curved,\nso that they swell out a little in the centre. This is called the\nentasis of the spire, and belongs to the study of optics in architecture.\nWhere the spire has no entasis the same effect is produced by the\nintroduction of small projecting gables, bands of carving, or a little\ncoronal of pinnacles.\n\nOne of the most clearly marked differences between English and continental\nspires is that the latter are much shorter than the towers which support\nthem, the towers, as a rule, being twice as high as the spires. In\nEngland, on the contrary, the spire is generally very much loftier\nthan the tower. At Shottesbrook, Berks, and Ledbury, Herefordshire, the\nspires occupy as much as three-fifths of the total elevation, and the\nusual rule in England is for the tower to be a little less in height\nthan the spire.\n\nThe masons lavished an extraordinary amount of care and skill on their\nspires. So much is this the case that there is hardly a medi\u00e6val spire\nin the country which can be called ill-designed or displeasing.\n\nChurch spires are very common in some counties and very rare in others.\nThere are, of course, exceptions, but it is in the flat counties that\nspires are most frequent, the most beautiful ones being found in\nNorthamptonshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire,\nStaffordshire, Nottinghamshire and Oxfordshire.\n\nThe top of the spire is usually capped with a weather vane terminating\nin a cock. The custom of using a cock as the flag of the vane is of very\nearly date, for Wolfstan, in his Life of S. Ethelwold, written towards\nthe end of the 10th century, speaks of one which surmounted Winchester\nCathedral. In the Bayeux Tapestry one is shown on the gable of Westminster\nAbbey, and one of the early Popes ordained that every church under the\npapal jurisdiction should be surmounted by a cock as emblematical of the\nsovereignty of the church over the whole world.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\nSTAINED GLASS.\n\n\nThe use of coloured glass in the windows of buildings devoted to\nreligious purposes appears to have been employed as early as the ninth\ncentury, but no examples remain of anything like so old a date, and we\nhave only illuminated missals and primitive drawings by members of the\nconventual bodies to guide us in determining the earliest styles of\ncoloured glazing. It appears to have consisted of more or less primitive\nrepresentations of the human form, with strong black lines to indicate\nthe features and folds of the drapery. The backgrounds were generally\nmasses of deep blue or red, and in the rare instances where landscapes\nwere introduced positive colours only appear to have been used. Our\noldest specimens in England are those in the choir aisles of Canterbury\nCathedral, which appear to be of the 12th century, and it is thought\nthat they are the remains of the original glazing that was put in when\nthis part of the building was rebuilt after a fire in 1174. The general\ndesign is composed of panels of various forms, in which are depicted\nsubjects from Holy Scripture, with backgrounds of deep blue or red; the\nspaces between the panels are filled with mosaic patterns in which blue\nand red colours predominate, and the whole design is framed in an\nelaborate border of leaves and scroll-work in brilliant colours.\n\n [Illustration: A Parish Church with a Shingle Broach Spire.\n (_See page 99_). Edenbridge, Kent. _Homeland Copyright._]\n\nOf thirteenth century windows we have some magnificent examples\n--unfortunately few unmutilated--as at York, where is the five-light\nlancet window situated in the north end of the transept, known as the\nFive Sisters of York. Of this date, also, are the large circular window\nof Lincoln Cathedral, and the windows at Chetwode, Bucks; Westwell,\nKent; West Horsley, Surrey; and Beckett's Crown, Canterbury.\n\nA little later, in the Decorated period, we get the great east window\nof York Cathedral, 75 ft. high and 32 ft. broad; the east window of\nGloucester Cathedral, 72 ft. high and 38 ft. broad; and other fine\nwindows at Tewkesbury Abbey; Merton College, Oxford; Wroxhall\nAbbey, Warwickshire; and the churches of Chartham, Kent; Stanford,\nLeicestershire; Ashchurch, Glous.; Cranley, Surrey; Norbury, Derbyshire,\nand others. Salisbury Cathedral has retained portions, but very lovely\nportions, of the glazing of its west windows, and enough is left to show\nthat it was little inferior to the great windows of York and Gloucester.\nCarlisle Cathedral, too, has preserved fragments of the original glass\nin the tracery of the great east window, but the lower part of the\nglazing is modern. Windows in the Decorated style continued to be\narranged in panels, with the spaces between them filled with flowing\npatterns of foliage, in which the vine and ivy leaves predominate.\nSingle figures are more common than in the previous style, and when used\nare generally shown beneath a simple pediment or canopy. In the early\nexamples they only occupy a portion of the window light, but later they\nare found occupying nearly the whole of the surface and are surmounted\nby large and elaborate canopies. Quarries are much used in this style,\nsometimes quite plain, but more often with leaves or rosettes painted on\nthem in black lines, or painted with the vine and ivy leaves so arranged\nthat they form a repeating pattern over the whole window. At this\nperiod, too, heraldry began to be employed in the decoration of the\nwindows to which it is always an appropriate and artistic adjunct, and\nmany authentic and valuable examples of our national heraldry have thus\nbeen preserved for posterity.\n\nWith the advent of the Perpendicular style the glazing became more\nuniform in character, the glass was thinner and lighter, the tints\npaler, and the whole effect more brilliant and transparent. The\npaintings for the most part consist of large figures under elaborate\ncanopies, frequently occupying an entire light, and in the patterns and\nsmaller decorations there is a greater freedom of design, and the whole\ntreatment is more harmonious and artistic than in any other period. The\nuse of heraldry became very common, and inscriptions on long narrow\nscrolls were frequently employed. Among the best examples of this period\nare the windows at S. Margaret's Church, Westminster; King's College\nChapel, Cambridge; Fairford Church, Gloucestershire; and Morley Church,\nDerbyshire.\n\nThe Reformation, with its vast social and political upheaval, was not\nconducive to the encouragement of the fine arts, and from this period\nthe art of glazing in England declined beyond measure, and was not the\nonly art that received its death-blow in the triumph of Puritanism. The\nart has, however, revived greatly during recent years, thanks, among\nother artists, to William Morris and Burne-Jones. A few words must\nbe said about the \"Jesse\" window found in some of our cathedrals and\nchurches. Strictly speaking, it is a representation of the genealogy of\nChrist, in which the different persons forming the descent are placed on\nscrolls of foliage branching out of each other, intended to represent a\ntree. It was also wrought into a branched candlestick, thence called a\nJesse, a common piece of furniture in ancient churches. The subject is\nfound on a window at Llanrhaiadr y Kinmerch, Denbighshire, on the stone\nwork of one of the chancel windows at Dorchester Church, Oxfordshire,\nand in carved stone on the reredos of Christchurch Priory, Hants.\n\nIt is not perhaps generally known that the actual colours used in early\nstained glass possessed each of them their own specific symbolism.\nUnderlying the obvious story conveyed by the human figures or decorated\ndevices, there was an inner story to be read with profit by those who\nunderstood the mystic symbolism concerning colours. Without entering at\nlength into this interesting subject, it may yet be stated that green\nwas the symbol of Regeneration, red of Divine Love, white of Divine\nWisdom, yellow of Faith, and grey, or a mixture of black and white, the\nemblem of Terrestrial Death and Spiritual Immortality. These colours at\ndifferent times or in different countries had other meanings as well,\nand ecclesiologists tell us that the colours chosen for depicting the\nrobes of our Lord differ according to the period of His life which it\nwas intended to represent.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\nCRYPTS.\n\n\nThe crypts so generally found beneath our cathedrals and abbeys, and so\nfrequently under our churches, rarely extend beyond the choir or chancel\nand its aisles, and are sometimes of very small dimensions. They are\noften coeval with the upper parts of the building, and although not so\nelaborate in ornamentation as the fabric they support, they are almost\nwithout exception well constructed and well finished pieces of building.\nIn some cases the crypt is of much older date than any portion of\nthe superstructure, as is the case at York, Worcester and Rochester\ncathedrals. During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the roofs were\noften richly groined, and upheld by cylindrical columns or clustered\npiers, and furnished with handsome bases and decorated capitals. There\nis abundant evidence that crypts were at one time furnished with altars,\npiscinas, and the various fittings requisite for the celebration of the\nmass, and they were used as sepulchres, wherein the shrines of relics\nand martyrs were carefully preserved. Some authorities claim a purely\nSaxon origin for the crypts at Ripon Cathedral, Hexham Abbey, and Repton\nChurch, Derbyshire. The Ripon example is a plain barrel-vaulted chamber,\nabout 11 ft. long and 8 ft. wide, with no pillars or ornament of any\nkind. It is popularly known as S. Wilfrid's Needle, but the exact origin\nof the name is lost in obscurity. The Hexham crypt is very similar in\ncharacter, but is somewhat longer, being more than 13 ft. long and 8 ft.\nwide. As at Ripon, there are hollows or shallow niches in the walls in\nwhich lamps may possibly have been placed. The third reputed Saxon crypt\nis that at Repton, but it has little in common with the other two, its\nsuperficial area being nearly twice as great and the roof is supported\non four columns, with plain square capitals rudely carved, and bearing\nmuch similarity to early Norman work.\n\nThe position of the crypt varies. At Beverley Minster it is on the\nsouth side of the south-west tower; in Hereford Cathedral it is under a\nside chapel, while at Lastingham, in Yorkshire, the crypt extends under\nthe whole of the church, including the apse. At Wells the crypt is\nbeneath the chapter-house, and Durham Cathedral has three crypts, one\nunder what was the dormitory, another beneath the refectory, and the\nthird under the prior's chapel. Of crypts of Norman date we have many\nexamples, of which, perhaps, our best are those at Gloucester, Worcester,\nCanterbury and Winchester Cathedrals, while Canterbury is probably the\nlargest of them all. Good crypts are also found at Wimborne Minster,\nChristchurch Priory, and in our smaller churches at Repton and S.\nPeter's-in-the-East, Oxford.\n\nThe Wimborne crypt is lighted by four windows. The vaulting is supported\nby two pairs of pillars which form three aisles, each of three bays. Mr.\nPerkins, in his book on Wimborne Minster, says, \"On each side of the\nplace where the altar stood there are two openings into the choir\naisles. The exteriors of these are of the same form and size as the\ncrypt windows, but they are deeply splayed inside, and probably were\nused as hagioscopes or squints, to allow those kneeling in the choir\naisles to see the priest celebrating mass at the crypt altar.\" The crypt\nat Christchurch is of Norman date, and now serves as a vault for the\nMalmesbury family. The crypt of Canterbury Cathedral is claimed and\njustly claimed, perhaps, as the largest and most beautiful in England.\nIt is thought to contain fragments of Roman and Saxon work, and much of\nit dates from the days of S. Anselm (1096-1100). It was here that the\nremains of S. Thomas \u00e0 Becket lay from 1170 to 1220, and \"here that\nHenry II., fasting and discrowned, with naked feet, bared back, and\nstreaming tears, performed on July 12th, 1174, the memorable penance for\nhis share in the murder of the great Archbishop.\"\n\nIt was here too, in later times that the Walloons were granted, by Queen\nElizabeth, the privilege of carrying on their silk-weaving, and it was\nalso reserved as a place of worship for French Protestants.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\nHOW TO DESCRIBE AN OLD CHURCH.\n\n\nHaving carefully read the foregoing chapters, it should be possible for\nanyone interested in the subject to be able to write a fairly accurate\ndescription of any old church. The record should, if possible, be\namplified with sketches or photographs.\n\nIn course of time, decay, neglect and restoration will deprive our\nancient buildings of every visible stone of original work which they\npossess, and careful records of this kind, written, photographed and\nsketched, may be of the highest possible value to future generations of\nhistorians and architects, long after the objects themselves have ceased\nto exist. The work in itself is of absorbing interest, and the more one\nstudies these works of past ages the stronger becomes the conviction\nthat our old buildings, whether cathedral, castle or simple village\nchurch, are the landmarks of the nation's history, and a priceless\ninheritance of beauty and art the conservation of which is the duty of\nall generations.\n\nThe principal points to be noted are--1. The name of the church. 2. Its\nsituation. 3. Its dedication. 4. General plan. 5. The style of\narchitecture to which each portion belongs. 6. Any peculiarity of the\narchitecture, blocked up windows, etc. 7. Any ancient furniture,\nscreens, bench-ends, glass. 8. Any monuments, tablets, or mural\npaintings. 9. Church plate, bells, registers. 10. Any local traditions.\nThe record should be made somewhat in the following manner.\n\nThe church of ---- is prettily situated on rising ground some quarter of\na mile north of the village, and on the main road to ---- . It is\napproached by a picturesque timber lych-gate, and consists of nave,\naisles and chancel, having a side chapel to the north and a single\ntransept to the south. At the west end is a Decorated tower and spire.\nThere are two porches, one on the north side and the other on the west,\nwhich last has a niche for a figure over the doorway and seats on either\nside. The nave is Perpendicular, as is the greater part of the rest of\nthe fabric. Above the nave rises a lofty and noble clerestory, divided\nfrom the aisles by five rather obtusely-pointed arches supported by\nrichly moulded piers with small moulded capitals. Each bay of the\nclerestory contains two three-light windows of late Perpendicular date.\nThe roof is flat pitched and is of oak, the principals are adorned with\npanelled tracery and show vestiges of ancient colour decoration. The\nwindows of the aisles are late Decorated in style; they are of three\nlights, the traceries elegant and richly moulded. The east window is\nPerpendicular and is much sub-divided by mullions and transoms; in the\nupper portions are some heraldic coats of arms, which appear to have\nformed part of a much earlier window. The chancel is divided from the\nnave by a fine open oak screen, coeval with the larger part of the\nbuilding. It is richly carved and gilded, and in the right-hand side of\nthe chancel arch are the steps which formerly led up to the top of it.\nThe chancel, together with its chapel, is vaulted in stone with well\nmarked ribs and carved bosses. The transept, late Perpendicular, opens\ninto the south side of the nave by a four-centred arch, and has a\nrich flat ceiling. In the chancel is a piscina of Early English date,\ntogether with a sedilia of the same period. On the north side of the\nchancel, resting on the floor, is a cross-legged effigy, in chain mail,\nsurcoat, etc., and bearing on his left arm a shield, but all much\nmutilated. There is a local tradition that it represents Sir ----, but\nthere is no evidence by which he can be identified. Features of the\nchurch are the many highly carved bench ends, all in oak, representing a\ngreat variety of subjects, such as dragons, serpents, etc., while a few\nbear the arms of local families who probably bore the cost of the work.\nThe pulpit is Jacobean, and has no special feature. The font, which\nstands in the centre of the nave, is square in form and is supported by\na modern round plinth. It is constructed of marble, the four sides being\ncarved in low relief with intersecting patterns. It is possibly of\nNorman date, and is the only existing feature of a much earlier church.\nThe tower and spire are Decorated; the latter is of stone with four\npinnacles at the base, and has a little coronal of pinnacles. The belfry\nwindows are arranged in pairs on each side of the tower. The tower or\nwestern window is of five lights, richly Decorated in style.\n\n Illustration:\n  KEY TO DIAGRAM OF THE INTERIOR ELEVATION OF A BAY OF A CHURCH.\n\n  CLERESTORY.\n\n   26 Boss.\n   25 Vaulting Rib.\n   24 Vault.\n   23 Vaulting Rib.\n   22 Tracery of C. Window.\n   21 Clerestory Window.\n   20 Sill of Clerestory Window.\n   19 Base of Jamb, C. Arch.\n   18 Jamb of C. Arch.\n   17 Clerestory String.\n\n  BLIND STOREY (TRIFORIUM).\n\n   16 Capital of Vaulting Shaft.\n   15 Tracery of Triforium.\n   14 Triforium Arch.\n   13 Capital of T. Pier.\n   12 Pier of Triforium.\n   11 Triforium String.\n\n  GROUND STOREY.\n\n   10 Tracery of Aisle Window.\n    9 Aisle Window.\n    8 Sill of Aisle Window.\n    7 Wall Arcade.\n    6 Vaulting Shaft.\n    5 Corbel.\n    4 Pier Arch.\n    3 Capital of Pier.\n    2 Pier.\n    1 Base of Pier.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES.\n\n1: So called from its \"flame\"-like appearance, producing forms which\n   resemble elongated tongues of flame. There is great beauty in much of\n   this work, but it is constructionally weak. The finest example is\n   Chartres Cathedral.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nA GLOSSARY OF THE PRINCIPAL TERMS USED IN ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE.\n\n\n ABACUS         Derived from the Greek _Abax_--a tray or flat board, an\n                essential feature of the Grecian and Roman orders, but\n                now used to describe the slab forming the upper part of\n                a column, pier, etc.\n\n ABBEY          A term for a union of ecclesiastical buildings, for the\n                housing of those conventual bodies presided over by an\n                abbot or abbess, supposed to be derived from the Hebrew\n                _ab_, \"father.\"\n\n ACANTHUS       A plant, the leaves of which are represented in the\n                capitals of the Corinthian orders.\n\n AISLE          French _aile_, a wing, the lateral division of a church.\n\n ALMONRY        A room where alms were distributed.\n\n ALTAR          An elevated table dedicated to the Sacrament of the Holy\n                Eucharist, and usually called the Communion Table.\n\n ALMERY, AUMERY,\n and AUMBREY    A recess or small cupboard in the wall of a church, used\n                to contain the chalices, patens, etc., for the use of\n                the priest. They are sometimes near the _piscina_, but\n                are usually on the opposite side of the chancel.\n\n ANTE-CHAPEL    The outer part of a chapel.\n\n APSE           The semi-circular or polygonal recess at the east end of\n                the choir or aisles of a church.\n\n ARCADE         A series of arches, open or closed with masonry, and\n                supported by columns or piers.\n\n ARCH           A construction of bricks or stones so placed as by\n                mutual pressure to support each other and a\n                superincumbent weight. They may be semi-circular,\n                segmental, elliptical, stilted, horse-shoe, pointed,\n                trefoiled, cinquefoiled, or ogee.\n\n ARCHITRAVE     In classical architecture, the lowest division of the\n                entablature resting immediately on the abacus of the\n                capital. In Gothic buildings the ornamental mouldings\n                round the openings of doors, windows, etc.\n\n ARCHIVOLT      The under surface of the curve of an arch, from impost\n                to impost.\n\n ASHLAR         Shaped or squared stone used in building, as\n                distinguished from that in the rough.\n\n ASTRAGAL       A small semi-circular bead or moulding.\n\n BALL FLOWER    An ornament resembling a ball in a circular flower\n                with three enclosing petals. Dec.\n\n BASE           The lower member of a column, pier, or wall.\n\n BASILICA       A Roman law-court. Early Christian churches when\n                built on the same lines were called by the same name.\n\n BILLET         An ornament much used in Norman work and formed by\n                cutting a moulding in notches, so that the remaining\n                parts resembled wooden billets or pieces of stick.\n\n BLIND STOREY   See Triforium.\n\n BOSSES         Ornamental projections usually of foliage and placed\n                at the intersection of the ribs of vaults, ceilings,\n                etc.\n\n BRACES         Timbers which brace or support the main rafters. Also\n                called _struts_.\n\n BROACH         A spire, generally octagonal and springing from the\n                square top of the tower, without a parapet. (_See\n                page 105_).\n\n BUTTRESS       A projection from a wall, giving it additional strength.\n\n CANOPY         In Gothic architecture an ornamental hood or projection\n                over doors, windows, niches, tombs, etc., and rarely\n                found except in the Dec. and Perp. styles.\n\n CAPITAL        The head of a column or pilaster, found in a great\n                variety of shapes.\n\n CATHEDRAL      A church presided over by a Bishop. The principal\n                church of a diocese.\n\n CHALICE        The cup used for the wine at the celebration of the\n                Eucharist.\n\n CHAMFER        The surface formed by cutting away the rectangular edge\n                of wood or stone work.\n\n CHANCEL        The choir or eastern part of a church, appropriated to\n                the use of those who officiate in the performance of\n                the services.\n\n CHANTRY        A chapel often containing a tomb of the founder, and\n                in which masses were said.\n\n CHAPEL         A small building attached to cathedrals and large\n                churches.\n\n CHAPTER-HOUSE  The room where the Dean and Prebendaries meet for the\n                transaction of business.\n\n CHEVRON        An ornament characteristic of the Norman period and\n                divided into several equal portions chevron-wise or\n                zig-zag.\n\n CHOIR          That part of a church to the east of the nave where the\n                services are celebrated, also called chancel, and\n                frequently separated from the nave by an open screen of\n                stone or wood.\n\n CINQUEFOIL     An ornamental foliation used in arches, tracery, etc.,\n                and composed of projecting points or cusps, so arranged\n                that the opening resembles five leaves.\n\n CLERESTORY     Possibly the _clear_ storey. An upper storey standing\n                above or clear of the adjacent roofs, and pierced by\n                windows to give increased light.\n\n CLOISTER       A covered walk or ambulatory forming part of a\n                cathedral or college quadrangle.\n\n CLUSTERED\n COLUMN         A pier made up of several columns or shafts in a cluster.\n\n COLONNADE      A row or rows of columns supporting a roof or building.\n\n CORBEL         Usually a moulded or carved ornament projecting from the\n                walls, acting as a bracket and capable of bearing a\n                super-incumbent weight.\n\n CORNICE        The horizontal termination of a building in the form of\n                a moulded projection.\n\n COURSE         A continuous and regular line of stones or bricks in the\n                wall of a building.\n\n CROCKETS       Projecting ornaments in the form of leaves, flowers,\n                etc., used to embellish the angles of pinnacles,\n                spires, gables, canopies, etc.\n\n CROSS          The accepted symbol of the Christian religion and an\n                architectural church ornament usually placed upon the\n                apex of the gable. A large cross called a rood was at one\n                time always placed over the entrance to the chancel. The\n                cross was worn as a personal ornament ages before the\n                Christian era by the Assyrians, and we are told that the\n                Druids also used this symbol in very early times.\n\n CRYPT          Sometimes called the Undercroft, a vaulted chamber,\n                usually underground and, in churches, rarely extending\n                beyond the area of the choir or chancel, and often of\n                less dimensions.\n\n CUSPS          Projecting points giving the foliated appearance to\n                tracery, arches, panels, etc.\n\n DORMER         A gabled window pierced through a sloping roof.\n\n DRIPSTONE      A projecting ledge or narrow moulding over the heads of\n                doorways, windows, etc., to carry off the rain.\n\n FAN-TRACERY    Tracery in which the ribs form a fan-like appearance and\n                diverge equally in every direction. (Peculiar to the\n                late Perp.)\n\n FLAMBOYANT     Tracery whereof the curves assume flame-like waves and\n                shapes.\n\n FLYING\n BUTTRESS       A buttress in the form of a bridge, usually transferring\n                the thrust of the main roof from the clerestory walls to\n                the main or aisle buttresses.\n\n FONT           The vessel for holding the consecrated water used in\n                baptism.\n\n GARGOYLE       A projecting spout usually grotesquely carved and used\n                to throw the water from the roof well away from the\n                building.\n\n GROIN          The line of intersection in vaulted roofs.\n\n IMPOST         Horizontal mouldings, capping a column or pier, from\n                which the arch springs.\n\n JAMB           The side of a window or door.\n\n KEYSTONE       The central stone at the top of an arch. The bosses\n                in vaulted ceilings are frequently called keys.\n\n LADY CHAPEL    A chapel dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary,\n                called \"Our Lady.\"\n\n LANTERN        A small structure or erection surmounting a dome or\n                tower to admit light. These towers are known as Lantern\n                Towers.\n\n LOZENGE        A name given in modern times to Norman mouldings which\n                partake of a lozenge formation.\n\n LYCH-GATE      From the Anglo-Saxon _lich_, a corpse. A small and\n                often picturesque shelter at the entrance to a\n                churchyard.\n\n MINSTER        The church usually of a monastery or abbey or one to\n                which such has been an appendant. York and Beverley,\n                however, are exceptions to this rule.\n\n MISERERE       A small bracket on the undersides of the seats of\n                stalls.\n\n MOULDING       A term generally applied to the contours given to angle\n                projections or hollows of arches, doors, windows, etc.\n\n MULLION        The dividing bars of stone or wood between the lights\n                of windows, or the openings of screens.\n\n M\u00dcNSTER        has now lost its simple application.\n (MONASTERY)\n\n NAVE           From _navis_, a ship, the main body of a church west\n                of the chancel.\n\n NICHE          An alcove or recess in a wall for holding a statue or\n                ornament.\n\n OGEE           A moulding or arch formed of a curve or curves somewhat\n                like the letter S, the curve of contra-flexure, part\n                being concave and part convex.\n\n ORDERS         In Gothic architecture, the receding mouldings of an\n                arch.\n\n PARCLOSE       The screen or railings protecting a monument or chantry.\n\n PARVISE        An open space or porch at the entrance to a church, and\n                often wrongly applied to the room over a church porch.\n\n PATEN          The small plate or salver used to hold the Consecrated\n                Bread in the celebration of the Eucharist.\n\n PENDANT        Ornaments which hang or _depend_ from a ceiling or roof.\n\n PENTHOUSE      A covering projecting over a door, window, etc., as a\n                protection from the weather.\n\n PIER           The masses or clusters of masonry between doors, windows,\n                etc.; the supports from which arches spring.\n\n PILLAR         A term frequently confounded with column, but differing\n                from it in not being subservient to the rules of\n                classical architecture, and in not of necessity\n                consisting of a single circular shaft.\n\n PINNACLE       A small turreted ornament tapering towards the top,\n                and used as a termination to many parts of Gothic\n                architecture.\n\n PISCINA        The stone basin or sink in the chancel used for\n                cleansing the communion vessels.\n\n PLINTH         The lower division of the base of a column, pier or wall.\n\n POPPY-HEAD     An ornament boldly carved on the tops of bench ends, etc.\n\n PRESBYTERY     A term sometimes used to include the whole of the choir,\n                but more often meant to refer to the eastern end of the\n                choir from which it is generally raised by several steps.\n\n QUARRIES or\n QUARRELS       The small diamond, square or other the shaped panes used\n                in plain glazing.\n\n QUATREFOIL     The shape resembling four leaves formed in tracery or\n                panels by cusps.\n\n QUOIN          The external angle of a building, generally of ashlar.\n\n REREDOS        The wall or screen at the back of an altar, often\n                enriched with carving, niches, statues, etc.\n\n ROOD-BEAM or\n ROOD-LOFT      The loft or beam which, previous to the Reformation,\n                supported the Great Rood, or Crucifix.\n\n ROSE WINDOW    A term often used to denote a circular window of\n                several lights.\n\n ROTUNDA        A term used to describe a church or other building\n                which is of circular formation both within and without.\n\n SACRISTRY      A room used in churches for storing the plate and\n                valuables.\n\n SANCTUARY      See Presbytery.\n\n SEDILIA        A seat or seats, generally canopied and situated on the\n                south side of the chancel and used in pre-Reformation\n                days by the officiating clergy during the pauses in the\n                mass.\n\n SHAFT          The part of a column or pillar between the capital and\n                the base.\n\n SHRINE         Often called the feretory. The place where relics were\n                deposited.\n\n SOFFIT         The word means literally a ceiling, but is generally\n                used to describe the flat under-surface of arches,\n                cornices, stairways, etc.\n\n SPANDRELS      The spaces between the arch of a doorway or window and\n                the rectangular mouldings over it. Early tracery\n                originated from the piercing of the spandrels of windows.\n\n SPIRE          The acutely pointed termination of towers, etc.,\n                originating by the elongation of the early pyramidal\n                roofs.\n\n SPLAY          The slanting or sloped surface of a window opening in the\n                thickness of the wall, also of doorways, etc.; the term\n                is also applied to bevels and other sloped surfaces.\n\n SPRINGER       See Voussoir.\n\n SQUINT         An oblique opening or slit in the wall of a church, for\n                the purpose of enabling persons in the aisles or\n                transepts to see the elevation of the Host at the High\n                Altar. They are mostly found on the sides of the chancel\n                arch, and are frequently called _hagioscopes_.\n\n STOUP          A vessel for consecrated water, at or near the entrance\n                to a church.\n\n STRING or\n STRING COURSE. A horizontal projecting band of stone in the wall of a\n                building.\n\n STRUT          See Brace.\n\n TOOTH\n ORNAMENT       An ornament used almost exclusively in the E.E. style,\n                resembling a square four-leaved flower, and thought to\n                be based on the dog-tooth violet.\n\n TRANSOM        A horizontal cross-bar in a panel or window.\n\n TRACERY        The ornamental stonework in the upper part of a window;\n                when formed by the mullions it is called bar tracery\n                and when the spandrel is pierced, plate tracery. Also\n                used largely on tombs, screens, doorways, etc.\n\n TRANSEPTS      The projecting arms of a cruciform church, often wrongly\n                called \"cross-aisles.\"\n\n TRANSITION     A term used to describe the process of change from one\n                style of architecture to another. The three great periods\n                of transition are from the Romanesque and Norman to the\n                Early English; the Early English to the Decorated, and\n                the Decorated to the Perpendicular.\n\n TREFOIL        An ornamental foliation in the heads of windows, panels,\n                etc., in which the spaces formed by the cusps resemble\n                three leaves.\n\n TRIFORIUM      or Blind-Storey. An open gallery or arcade without\n                windows immediately above the pier arcade and under the\n                roof of the aisle.\n\n TYMPANUM       The space between the top of a square-headed door and the\n                arch above it; frequently sculptured.\n\n VAULT          Roofing of stone constructed on the principle of the\n                arch, the intersections of which are termed groins and\n                are in the pointed styles usually ribbed.\n\n VAULTING\n SHAFTS         Small shafts sometimes rising from the floor, sometimes\n                from the capital of a pillar and sometimes from a corbel,\n                and intended as supports for the ribs of a vault.\n\n VESICA PISCIS  An oval shape or figure formed by two equal circles\n                cutting each other in their centres. Very commonly found\n                on episcopal and monastic seals.\n\n VOUSSOIR       The wedge-shaped stones forming an arch, the centre one\n                of which is the _keystone_ and those at the impost or\n                starting point of the curve are the _springers_.\n\n ZIG-ZAG        See Chevron.\n\n\n\n\nA SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ENGLISH ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE.\n\n\n Adeline, J.       Art Dictionary of Terms.\n Bland, W.         Arches, Piers, Buttresses, etc.\n Blomfield, R.     Short History of Renaissance Architecture.\n Bond, Francis     English Cathedrals Illustrated.\n Bond, Francis     Gothic Architecture in England.\n Bonney, T. G.     Cathedrals, Abbeys, and Churches of England and Wales.\n Carter, J.        The Ancient Architecture of England.\n Colling, J. K.    Details of Gothic Architecture.\n Corroyer, E.      Gothic Architecture.\n Cram, R. Adams    Church Building.\n Davidson, E. A.   Gothic Stonework.\n Fergusson, J.     Handbook of Architecture.\n Fergusson, J.     History of Architecture.\n Fairbairns, A.    Portfolio of English Cathedrals.\n Garbett, E. L.    Principles of Design in Architecture.\n Markland, J. H.   Remarks on Churches.\n Moore, C. H.      Development and Character of Gothic Architecture.\n Paley, F. A.      Manual of Gothic Architecture.\n Paley, F. A.      Manual of Gothic Mouldings.\n Parker, J. H.     A.B.C. of Gothic Architecture.\n Parker, J. H.     Concise Glossary of Architecture.\n Parker, J. H.     Introduction to the Study of Gothic Architecture.\n Perkins, Rev. T.  Handbook of Gothic Architecture.\n Prior, Ed. S.     History of Gothic Art.\n Pugin, A. W.      Treatise on Chancel Screens and Rood Lofts.\n Rickman, Thos.    Gothic Architecture.\n Rickman, Thos.    Attempts to discriminate the Styles of Architecture\n                   in England.\n Sharpe, Edmund    The Seven Periods of English Architecture.\n Sharpe, Edmund    Treatise on the Rise and Progress of Window Tracery.\n Scott, G.         History of Church Architecture.\n Ruskin, John      Seven Lamps of Architecture.\n Ruskin, John      Stones of Venice.\n Ruskin, John      Poetry of Architecture.\n Ruskin, John      Lectures on Architecture.\n Wall, J. C.       Shrines of British Saints.\n Winkle            British Cathedrals.\n Wilson, S.        Romance of our Ancient Churches.\n\n Bell's Cathedral Series.\n \"The Builder\" Portfolio of English Cathedrals.\n Murray's Handbooks to the Cathedrals.\n S.P.C.K. Illustrated Notes on English Church History.\n      Swan, Sonnenschein & Co. Notes on the Cathedrals.\n     \"Our English Minsters.\" Edited by Dean Farrar.\n\nThis bibliography does not claim to be complete, but is a selection of\nthe various books on the subject which should be studied by the student.\n\n\n\n\nIndex\n\n\n All Souls' College, Oxford, 76\n Altars, 80\n Alveston Church, Warwickshire, 41\n Amiens Cathedral, 57\n Anne, Queen, 76\n Apse, The, 27\n Arches--\n   Saxon, 35\n   Norman, 37\n   Early English, 49\n   Decorated, 62\n   Perpendicular, 66\n Ashchurch, Gloucestershire, 106\n\n Baptistery, The, 84\n Barfreston Church, Kent, 39, 41\n Barnack Church, Northants 32, 33, 34, 101\n Barnstaple, Devon, 98\n Barnwell, 92\n Barry, Sir C., 78, 79\n Basilica, The, 26\n Bayeux Tapestry, 41, 103\n Beaulieu, Hants, 90\n Beckett's Crown, Canterbury, 106\n Bede (quoted), 21, 23, 96\n Bells and Belfries, 95\n Bench Ends, 89\n Bertha, Queen, 23\n Beverley Minster, 109\n Billesley Church, Warwickshire, 78\n Bishopstone, Sussex, 32\n Bloxham Church, 101\n Boston, Lincs, 72\n Bovey Church, 92\n Bradford-on-Avon, 32\n Brewer, J. W. (quoted), 28\n Brighton Pavilion, 78\n Brigstock Church, Northants, 97\n Bristol Cathedral, 70\n British Churches, Early, 19\n Brixworth Church, 28, 32, 33, 97\n Broadmayne Church, 86\n Bruton, Som., 97\n Burne-Jones, Sir E., 107\n Bury St. Edmunds, 82\n Buttresses--\n   Norman, 43\n   Early English, 84\n   Decorated, 62\n   Perpendicular, 70\n Byzantium, 27\n\n Canterbury Cathedral, 43, 94, 101, 104, 110\n Capitals--\n   Norman, 42\n   Early English, 54\n   Decorated, 60\n   Perpendicular, 69\n Caradoc, King, 19\n Carlisle Cathedral, 60, 106\n Charles II., 76\n Charlton-on-Otmoor, 92\n Charlton Church, Kent, 106\n Chartres Cathedral, 101\n Chetwode, Bucks, 106\n Chichester Cathedral, 97\n Chipping Norton, Oxford, 81\n Christchurch Priory, 88, 94, 107, 110\n Christ Church, Spitalfields, 76\n Chudleigh Church, Devon, 92\n Church Furniture and Ornaments, 80\n Cirencester Church, Glos., 70\n Classic Reverse, The, 70\n Clerkenwell, 44\n Collumpton, Devon, 92\n Compton Church, 94\n Constantine, Emperor, 27\n Constantinople, 27\n Cranley, Surrey, 106\n Crawden's Chapel, 58\n Croyland Abbey, 96\n Crypts, 109\n Curfew, 96\n\n Decorated Style, The, 57\n Doisnel, Juliana, 44\n Dolton Church, 84\n Doorways--\n   Saxon, 30, 32\n   Norman, 39\n   Early English, 54\n   Decorated, 62\n   Perpendicular, 69\n Dorchester Church, Oxford, 107\n Dore Abbey, 81\n Dunstable, 92\n Dunster Church, 81, 92\n Durham Cathedral, 43, 73, 82, 94, 112\n\n Earl's Barton Church, 32, 33\n Early English Style, The, 47\n East Dereham, 97\n Edburton Church, 84\n Edington Church, Wilts, 72\n Edington, Bp. William, 72\n Edmund, Archbp. of Cant., 84\n Edward I., 49\n Edward III., 84\n Elizabeth, Queen, 81, 110\n Eltham Palace, 73\n Ely Cathedral, 29, 43, 57\n Ely Chapel, 60\n Ethelbert, King of Kent, 23\n Euston, Oxford, 94\n Evesham Abbey, 73, 97\n Exeter Cathedral, 89\n\n Fairford Church, Glos., 107\n Fan Vaulting, 69\n Fergusson, Dr. (quoted), 75\n Flying Buttresses, 56\n Fonts, 84\n Fordington S. George, Dorchester, 41\n Fotheringay Church, Northants, 73\n Fountains Abbey, 47\n Fuller, Thos. (quoted), 19\n Furness Abbey, 87\n Furniture, Church, 80\n\n Glass, Stained, 104\n Glastonbury Abbey, 19, 97\n Glossary, 115\n Gloucester Cathedral, 43, 73, 94, 106, 110\n Gothic Architecture, Leading Characteristics, 63\n Gothic Styles, The, 47\n Grantham, 101\n Greenstead Church, Essex, 32, 34, 35\n Grosmont, Monmouth, 81\n\n Hackness, 96\n Hanwell, Oxford, 94\n Hartland Church, 92\n Hawkesmore, 76\n Heckington, 86, 101\n Heigham, 72\n Henry I., 44\n Henry II., 49\n Henry III., 44, 48, 49\n Hereford Cathedral, 57, 110\n Hexham, 82, 109\n Hutchinson, Rev. J. M. (quoted), 49\n\n Iffley Church, Oxford, 39\n\n Jenkyns, Canon (quoted), 25\n John, King, 44, 48, 49\n Jones, Inigo, 75, 78\n\n Kemsing, Kent, 92\n Kenton Church, Devon, 90, 92\n King's College Chapel, Cambridge, 107\n King's Sutton, 101\n Knights Hospitallers, 44\n Knights Templars, 43\n\n Lady Chapel, Exeter, 60\n Langham Place, 78\n Lastingham Church, York, 110\n Laud, Archbishop, 16\n Ledbury, Hereford, 103\n Leighton Buzzard, 101\n Lichfield, Abbot, 97\n Lichfield, Cathedral, 57, 101\n Lincoln Cathedral, 43, 52, 57, 63, 81, 106\n Little Billing, 84\n Little Maplestead, 44\n Llanrhaiadr-y-Kinmerch, 107\n Luidhard, Bishop, 23\n Long Melford Church, Suffolk, 73\n Long Sutton, 92\n Luton Church, 58\n Lyminge, 25\n\n Magdalen College, Oxford, 90\n Malmesbury (family), 110\n Manchester Cathedral, 73, 88\n Markland (quoted), 97\n Mary, Queen, 81, 92\n Marylebone Church, 78\n Melbury Bubb, 84\n Merton College, Oxford, 58, 60, 106\n Minehead, 92\n Morley Church, Derbyshire, 107\n Morris, William, 107\n Morton Church, Soms., 73\n Mouldings--\n   Norman, 37\n   Early English, 52\n   Decorated, 62\n   Perpendicular, 69\n\n Newark, Notts., 92\n New College, Oxford, 72\n Norbury, Derbyshire, 106\n Norman Architecture, 35\n Norwich Cathedral, 29, 43\n\n Ornaments--\n   Norman, 37\n   Early English, 52\n   Decorated, 60, 62\n   Perpendicular, 68, 69, 70\n Ornaments, Church, 80\n Oxford Cathedral, 43, 101\n\n Palladio, 74, 75\n Parham, 84\n Parker (quoted), 31, 35, 88\n Parliament, Houses of, 78\n Patrixbourne Church, Kent, 41\n Perkins, Rev. T. (quoted), 110\n Perpendicular Styles, 64\n Perpendicular Towers, 72\n Perpendicular Spires, 73\n Peterborough Cathedral, 29, 43, 57\n Philippa, Queen, 84\n Piscinas, 87\n Piers--\n   Norman, 42\n   Early English, 54\n   Decorated, 60\n   Perpendicular, 68\n Plymtree, 92\n Pointed Arch, The, 49\n Porches, 53\n Porlock Church, Somerset, 81\n Pugin, 78, 79\n Pulpits, 90\n Pyecombe, 84\n Pylle Church, 86\n\n Radipole Church, Dorset, 98\n Ravenna, 33\n Reculver, 25\n Reform Club, 79\n Renaissance, The, 74\n Repton Church, Derby, 109, 110\n Reredos, The, 94\n Richard I., 48, 49\n Richborough, 25\n Rickman (quoted), 35\n Ripon Cathedral, 32, 109\n Rievaulx, 47\n Rochester Cathedral, 42, 57, 109\n Rolvenden Church, Kent, 86\n Romanesque Style, The, 27\n Rome, 33\n Ross, 101\n Rotherham Church, Yorks., 70\n Rothwell Church, 87\n Round Churches, The, 44\n Routledge, Rev. C. F., M.A., F.S.A., 24\n\n Saffron Walden, 73\n Saint Alban's Cathedral, 54, 94\n Saint Andrew's, Norwich, 73\n Saint Anselm, 110\n Saint Augustine, 19\n Saint Benet's, Cambridge, 32\n Saint Chad's Cathedral, Birmingham, 79\n Saint Clement's, Norfolk, 73\n Saint Cross, Winchester, 39\n Saint David's, Cathedral, 57, 73\n Saint Dunstan, 96\n Saint Edmundsbury, 97\n Saint Edmund, Martyr, 35\n Saint Etheldreda, 58\n Saint Ethelwold, 103\n Saint Giles', Oxford, 81\n Saint Hilda, 96\n Saint Lawrence, Bradford-on-Avon, 32, 33\n Saint Margaret's, Westminster, 107\n Saint Mark's, Venice, 28\n Saint Mary Abchurch, 76\n Saint Mary Magdalene, Ripon, 81\n Saint Mary Redcliffe, Bristol, 73\n Saint Mary's, Cambridge, 73\n Saint Mary's, Dover, 22\n Saint Mary's, Lincoln, 32\n Saint Mary's, Luton, 84\n Saint Mary's, Newark, 101\n Saint Mary's, Norwich, 73\n Saint Mary's, Ottery, 92\n Saint Mary's, Oxford, 73, 101\n Saint Mary's, Stamford, 92\n Saint Mary's, Taunton, 73\n Saint Mary's, Wareham, 81, 84\n Saint Mary's, Woolnoth, 76\n Saint Mary's, York, 32\n Saint Martin's, Canterbury, 22\n Saint Martin's, Wareham, 32\n Saint Michael's, Coventry, 73\n Saint Michael's, Oxford, 32, 34, 94\n Saint Nicholas, Lynn, 73\n Saint Nicholas, Newcastle, 73\n Saint Nicholas, Yarmouth, 63\n Saint Paul the Apostle, 19\n Saint Paul's Cathedral, 75, 76, 101\n Saint Paul's Churchyard, 90\n Saint Patrick, 21\n Saint Peter Port, Guernsey, 98\n Saint Peter's in the East, Oxford 110\n Saint Peter's, Lincoln, 32\n Saint Peter's, Norwich, 73\n Saint Peter's, Rome, 75, 76\n Saint Pierre, Caen, 101\n Saint Piran's, Perranporth, 21\n Saint Saviour's, Dartmouth, 90, 92\n Saint Saviour's Southwark, 94\n Saint Sepulchre, Cambridge, 44\n Saint Sepulchre, Northampton, 44\n Saint Sophia, Constantinople, 28\n Saint Stephen's, Bristol, 73\n Saint Stephen's Chapel, Westminster, 58\n Saint Stephen's, Walbrook, 76\n Saint Thomas \u00e0 Becket, 110\n Saint Wilfrid's Needle, 109\n Saint Wolfstan, 103\n Salisbury Cathedral, 47, 57, 101, 106\n Sanctuary Knockers, 82\n Saxon Architecture, 31\n Saxon Churches, 32\n Scott (quoted), 31\n Screens, 92\n Sedilia, 87\n Shottesbrook Church, Berks, 66, 103\n Shrewsbury, 90\n Silchester, 25\n Snettisham, Norfolk, 101\n Solihull, Warwickshire, 94\n Sompting, Sussex, 32, 99\n Southwell, 57, 87\n Southwold Church, Suffolk, 73\n Speyer Cathedral, 29\n Spires, 73, 99\n Squints, 90\n Stalls, 88\n Stanford, Leicester, 106\n Stone Church, Kent, 54\n Stoups, 86\n\n Temple Balsall, 44\n Temple Church, London, 44\n Tenby, 90\n Tewkesbury Abbey, 106\n Thaxted Church, Essex, 73\n Thornham Church, Kent, 86\n Towers, 33, 72\n Transom, The, 46, 49\n Trinity Church, Ely, 58\n Tympana, 41\n\n Uffendon, Devon, 92\n\n Vitruvius, 74\n\n Wakefield Church, Yorkshire, 73\n Walpole, Horace, 78\n Walton-on-the-Hill, Surrey, 84\n Wansted, Oxford, 101\n Wantsume, 25\n Warmington, Warwickshire, 81\n Wells Cathedral, 53, 57, 110\n West Horsley, Surrey, 106\n Westminster Abbey, 48, 57, 63, 76, 78, 103\n Westminster Hall, 73\n Westminster, Henry's VII.'s Chapel, 68, 88, 89\n Westwell, Kent, 106\n Wilford Church, Oxford, 101\n William the Conqueror, 96\n Wimborne Minster, 110\n Wimmington Church, Bedfordshire, 66\n Winchester Cathedral, 43, 63, 72, 85, 88, 103, 110\n Winchester College, 72\n Windows--\n   Saxon, 32\n   Norman, 39\n   Early English, 52\n   Decorated, 58\n   Perpendicular, 68\n Wing, 32\n Wootton Wawen, 32\n Worcester Cathedral, 57, 109, 110\n Worms Cathedral, 29\n Wren, Sir Christopher, 75, 76\n Wrexham Church, 72\n Wroxhall Abbey, 106\n Wykeham, William of, 72, 84\n Wymondham Church, 72\n\n York Minster, 32, 57, 63, 66, 73, 94, 106, 109\n\n\n\n\nTHE HOMELAND HANDBOOKS\n\nCopiously Illustrated and provided with Ordnance Maps and Plans.\n\n\nJANUARY, 1907.\n\n No.                                                          Cloth. Paper.\n\n 1 TONBRIDGE FOR THE ANGLER, THE HOLIDAY-MAKER, AND THE RESIDENT.\n     By Stanley Martin and Prescott Row                         1/-    6d.\n 2 TUNBRIDGE WELLS OF TO-DAY. By Stanley Martin and\n     Prescott Row. Ordnance Map and Plans. Second Edition       1/-    6d.\n 3 \"LONDON TOWN.\" By Eric Hammond                               1/-    6d.\n 4 \"LYONESSE\": THE ISLES OF SCILLY. By J. C. Tonkin and\n     Prescott Row. Fourth Edition. Map                          2/-    1/-\n 5 \"WOLFE-LAND\": THE WESTERHAM DISTRICT, KENT. By Gibson\n     Thompson. Third Edition. Ordnance Map                      1/6    1/-\n 6 \"KENT'S CAPITAL\": MAIDSTONE. By Stanley Martin and Prescott\n     Row. Second Edition. With Map                              1/-    6d.\n 7 CROYDON, NEW AND OLD. By Edward A. Martin, F.G.S., and\n     J. E. Morris, B.A. Third Edition. With Map                 1/-    6d.\n 8 DARTMOOR AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Beatrix F. Cresswell.\n     Edited by William Crossing. Fourth Edition. Ordnance Maps  2/-    1/-\n 9 ROCHESTER AND CHATHAM WITH PEN AND CAMERA. By\n     A. G. Munro, B.A. Second Edition. With Map                 1/6    6d.\n 10 REIGATE AND REDHILL. By T. F. W. Hamilton and W. Hodgson.\n     Second Edition. Ordnance Map                               1/-    6d.\n 11 \"SURREY'S CAPITAL\": GUILDFORD AND DISTRICT.\n     By J. E. Morris, B.A. Third Edition. With Map              1/6    6d.\n 12 DULVERTON AND DISTRICT: THE COUNTRY OF THE WILD RED DEER.\n     By F. J. Snell, B.A. Second Edition.\n     Cloth Edition contains Map                                 1/6    6d.\n 13 FARNHAM AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Gordon Home. With Map      2/-    1/-\n 14 GODALMING AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. Edited by Prescott Row.\n     Second Edition. With Ordnance Map                          1/-    6d.\n 15 TEIGNMOUTH AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Beatrix F. Cresswell.\n     Second Edition. With Ordnance Map                          1/-    6d.\n 16 HASTINGS AND ST. LEONARDS. By W. H. Sanders. With Plan      1/6    6d.\n 17 EPSOM AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Gordon Home. Ordnance Map    1/6    9d.\n 18 MINEHEAD, PORLOCK, AND DUNSTER: THE SEA-BOARD OF EXMOOR.\n     By C. E. Larter. Second Edition. Ordnance Map              1/-    6d.\n 19 CRANBROOK: THE TOWN OF THE KENTISH WEALD.\n     By Stanley Martin. Second Edition. With Map                1/6    6d.\n 20 DAWLISH, AND THE ESTUARY OF THE EXE.\n     By Beatrix F. Cresswell. Cloth Edition contains Map        1/-    6d.\n 21 ST. ALBANS: ITS ABBEY AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.\n     By C. H. Ashdown, F.R.G.S., F.C.S. With Ordnance Map       2/6    1/-\n 22 BROMLEY, BECKENHAM, AND CHISLEHURST. By George Clinch,\n     F.G.S. Ordnance Map                                        2/6    1/-\n 23 EXETER AND ITS CATHEDRAL.\n     By Beatrix F. Cresswell. With Plan                         1/-    6d.\n 24 KINGSTON-UPON-THAMES AND SURBITON.\n     By Dr. W. E. St. L. Finny. With Ordnance Map               2/6    1/-\n 25 EVESHAM AND ITS NEIGHBOURHOOD, INCLUDING BROADWAY.\n     By William Smith. With Map                                 1/6    1/-\n 26 PETWORTH AND MID WEST SUSSEX. By L. C. Barnes. With Map.\n      (Cloth only)                                              1/-    --\n 27 NEWQUAY, THE VALE OF LANHERNE, AND PERRANZABULOE.\n      By Fannie Goddard. Second Edition. Ordnance Map           1/-    6d.\n 28 HASLEMERE AND HINDHEAD WITH THEIR SURROUNDINGS.\n      By J. E. Morris, B.A. Second Edition. Ordnance Map        2/-    1/-\n 29 TAUNTON AND TAUNTON DEANE. By Beatrix F. Cresswell.\n      Ordnance Map                                              2/6    1/-\n 30 LITTLEHAMPTON, ARUNDEL, AND AMBERLEY.\n      By Rev. W. Goodliffe, M.A. Ordnance Map                   1/-    6d.\n 31 \"THE WESTERN GATE OF DARTMOOR\": TAVISTOCK AND THE DISTRICT.\n      By William Crossing. With Ordnance Map                    1/-    6d.\n 32 PLYMOUTH: \"THE METROPOLIS OF THE WEST.\"\n      By W. H. K. Wright. With Ordnance Map                     1/-    6d.\n 33 THE CHALFONT COUNTRY (SOUTH BUCKS). By S. Graveson.\n      Ordnance Map                                              1/6    1/-\n 34 DUNSTABLE, THE DOWNS, AND THE DISTRICT. By. G. Worthington\n      Smith, F.L.S., etc. With Maps                             2/-    1/-\n 35 THE QUANTOCK HILLS, THEIR COMBES AND VILLAGES.\n      By Beatrix F. Cresswell. Ordnance Map. (Cloth only)       2/6    --\n 36 OXTED, LIMPSFIELD, AND EDENBRIDGE. By Gordon Home.\n      Ordnance Map                                              1/-    6d.\n 37 LYNTON, LYNMOUTH, AND THE LORNA DOONE COUNTRY.\n      By J. E. Morris, B.A. Ordnance Map                        1/-    6d.\n 38 HORSHAM AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Rev. W. Goodliffe, M.A.\n      Ordnance Map                                              2/-    1/-\n 39 SEAFORD AND NEWHAVEN. By Geo. Day. Ordnance Map             1/-    6d.\n 40 THE GREAT OUSE. HUNTINGDON, ST. NEOTS, AND ST IVES. By\n      H. L. Jackson, M.A., and G. R. Holt Shafto. Ordnance Map  2/-    1/-\n 41 KING'S LYNN WITH ITS SURROUNDINGS, INCLUDING SANDRINGHAM.\n      By W. A. Dutt. Ordnance Map                               2/-    1/-\n 42 WOKING AND RIPLEY WITH THEIR SURROUNDINGS.\n      By A. H. Anderson. Ordnance Map                           2/-    1/-\n 43 HERTFORD AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By W. Graveson.\n      Ordnance Map.                                             2/-    1/-\n 44 DORKING AND LEATHERHEAD.\n      By Joseph E. Morris, M.A. Ordnance Map                    2/-    1/-\n 45 WALTHAM AND CHESHUNT. By Freeman Bunting. Ordnance Map      1/-    6d.\n 46 DORCHESTER WITH ITS SURROUNDINGS. By F. W. and Sidney\n      Heath. with a Foreword by Thomas Hardy. Ordnance Map      2/-    1/-\n 47 LUTON CHURCH. By Constance Isherwood. With Plan             1/-    6d.\n 48 READING AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By A. H. Anderson.\n      Ordnance Map                                              2/-    1/-\n 49 SUTTON AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.\n      By F. Richards. Ordnance Map                              2/-    1/-\n 50 WATFORD AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Walter Moore.\n      Ordnance Map                                              2/-    1/-\n 51 YEOVIL AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Frank Heath. Ordnance Map   2/-    1/-\n 52 AYLESBURY AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Walter Moore.\n    Ordnance Map                                                2/-    1/-\n 53 GRAVESEND AND ITS SURROUNDINGS.  By A. J. Philip.\n      Ordnance Map                                              2/-    1/-\n 54 HIGH WYCOMBE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. By Henry Harbour         --     --\n 55 OUR HOMELAND CHURCHES, AND HOW TO STUDY THEM.\n      By Sidney Heath                                           2/-    --\n\n\nHANDBOOKS FOR MANY OTHER TOWNS AND DISTRICTS ARE IN ACTIVE PREPARATION.","title":"Our Homeland Churches and How to Study Them","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":29687}