22

ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE.

profound scholar and theologian; while he was no less tinguished as a Scottish poet; and, as such, he was appreciated some of the most eminent men of his time, who were his frie and correspondents. His "Ecclesiastical History of Scotla from the earliest period to the year 1788," although peculia style, and defective in arrangement, is the only history of va which we possess. He died in the arms of his son, the I

Bishop of Aberdeen, whom he had the happiness to see at head of the Episcopal College. His memory, his genius, and virtues, are still cherished by the Scottish Episcopalians; and him it may be truly said, in the words of the poet, that

"A man he was to all the country dear;

And passing rich with forty pounds a year."*

(To be continued.)

བ

In a preceding number I directed my readers' attention to th following facts:

1. That in the Roman buildings the arch was used only for conve nience; and instead of courting admiration, shrunk from notice. 2. That the architects of the middle ages did not imitate th Romans only because they could not.

3. That the rib and pointed arch were introduced, not as orna ments, but as necessary deformities.

4. That it was the unavoidable prominence of these feature which, by giving taste a compulsory direction, as it were, drove men into the peculiarities of the Gothic, or rather Catholic, style,

This last assertion I illustrated in the history of the rib, which, on its first introduction, was ornamented almost at random, as will readily be perceived in the following specimens (see Plate): No. 1, fig. 1, a rib in Iffley church; fig. 2, a cluster of ribs in St. Peter's church, Oxford; fig. 3, a rib in the north aisle of Romsey Abbey The designers of these ribs seem to have been feeling their way in the dark; yet, if I am right in fancying that these attempts succeeded one another chronologically, in the order I have assigned to them, even here we may discern a tendency towards the character which ultimately prevailed, the section of fig. 3, if taken half-way between the points a, a, being not unlike that which I took from the aisles of Christ Church chancel. In the progress

It may be here observed, that Mr. Skinner's emoluments never exceeded the above sum; and too many of the present clergy are at present in the same situation. The district in which he spent his long life is a perfect wilderness. The thatched house or dwelling in which he resided is still pointed out to strangers.

of the works at Christ Church, the elastic character of which the rib was susceptible seems to have occurred distinctly to the architect, and was sufficiently brought out by him in the aisles of the nave, to approve itself afterwards as a pattern. Fig. B (in my last article) is the section which prevails throughout that most elegant structure, the Christ Church chapter-house; and fig. C, which, in effect, differs but little from it, is perhaps the most exquisite of the forms which has yet been devised for this purpose.

This I stated more in detail in the concluding part of my last article in the present it will be my object to trace the steps by which the idea of what, in my last article, I called elasticity found its way into other parts of the system.

And first, as regards the mouldings of the intercolumnar arches. When the Romans substituted the arch for the epistylium, they did not attempt to ornament it appropriately, but gave it the appearance of a bent architrave. No. 2, fig. 1, is the common Grecian architrave; fig. 2, the Roman misapplication of it. This device is obviously unmeaning; indeed, its defect is acknowledged by the practice of modern architects, who, for the sake of relief, frequently have recourse to a second arch, (as in fig. 3,) parallel to the first, and receding behind it. A relief of the same kind was sought in the middle ages, by modifying the form of the Roman architrave. Fig. 2 was turned into fig. 4; the recess detached the line a from ß, and thus gave the effect of a second receding arch.

With a slight modification of the form x, fig. 5 represents a horizontal section of two arches, such as fig. 4, resting back to back on the same pier, and branching in opposite directions: the dotted line represents the pier, or rather column, on which they rest. This fig. is taken from the nave of Christ Church; (e) is the section of a perpendicular shaft, which apparently supports the vaulting, and which terminates in some fanciful ornament, where it comes in contact with (x) (x). I shall not be very wrong in ascribing this specimen to the last few years of the reign of Henry I. So far, then, I find the treatment of the Gothic intercolumnar arch corresponding closely with the Roman, indeed deviating from it only in that respect in which modern imitators of Roman architecture have allowed themselves to deviate from it.

Fig. 6 is a corresponding section taken from the work of William of Sens, at Canterbury. It is evidently a modification, and by no means a violent one, of fig. 5; but the striking thing about it is this, that it differs from fig. 5 and fig. 3 just in those respects in which figs. 5 and 3 differ from fig. 2. The rods (a) (B) are still farther enlarged, and the recess & deepened, as if William of Sens had recognized in Christ Church, or some similar building, an approximation to the form which his eye felt the want of, and was encouraged to feel his way a step farther. By these two