Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 4.djvu/198

180 tions by those sound rules of criticism which are alike applicable to all works of art, and not by the sole standard of antiquarian conformity. But I fear that this principle cannot be carried into effect whilst glass painting is confined to mere imitations.

"In estimating the merit of an imitative work two points are really presented for consideration; its quality as a work of art, and its conformity with the conventionalities of style. But inasmuch as a knowledge of the conventionalities of style is more commonly possessed than a knowledge of the principles of art, because the former is incomparably easier of acquirement than the latter; amateurs, who exert a very powerful influence on the state and condition of glass painting, are apt in their criticisms to fall into the error of regarding a conformity with style, not as an accessory to the glass painting, but as constituting the sole end and essential object of the work. Hence a copy, or mere compilation, scarcely rising in merit above a copy of some ancient glass, or other painting, is so often preferred to a design, which attempts, however artistically, to carry out an ancient style in spirit, rather than in conventionality only: because the mere copy will naturally exhibit a closer and more literal compliance with the petty details of style than the latter more intrinsically meritorious work; a course which cannot fail to retard materially the real advancement of glass painting as an art, and the full developement of its powers.

"Being clearly of opinion that the art of glass painting has not hitherto attained that perfection of which it is susceptible,—for the peculiar circumstances of the sixteenth century caused its decline before it arrived at complete developement,—I trust I may be excused if I go counter to the generally received opinions of the age, in advocating, as the surest means of effecting the true advancement of the art, the total relinquishment of all copies or imitations of ancient glass whatsoever, whether perfect or imperfect in themselves; and the substitution of a new and original style of glass painting, founded on the most perfect practice of the Mosaic system, and sufficiently comprehensive to include within itself designs of the most varied character; some for instance bearing a resemblance to Early English glass paintings, some to Decorated glass paintings, and so forth, without however ceasing to belong to the nineteenth century, or degenerating into imitations." Part i. p. 283.

Without doubt the position taken by the writer, strong and tenable as it is, will be vehemently assailed. It will probably be pronounced incongruous to combine the characteristics of different centuries; and so it would be, if our object were to produce a work which shall be mistaken for one of a certain period, say for instance the fourteenth century. But if our object be to arrive at the highest degree of perfection, we are far more likely to attain it by combining such excellencies as we find, wherever they exist, provided they are not absolutely incompatible with each other, than by tying ourselves down to the copy of originals which in any point exhibit some positive imperfection. If figures of a graceful design and artistic execution but rarely occur in English Decorated windows, it is not because