Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 4.djvu/200

 182 NOTICES OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. therefore be no real incongruity between Decorated architecture, and the refined drawing, grouping, and execution of the Cinque Cento period. The mere style of architectural ornament used in the painting is altogether a subordinate matter, and may be varied so as to harmonize with any descrip- tion of edifice. But even in the arrangement of its architectural features the Cinque Cento painted window has an advantage over the Perpendicular. In figure and canopy windows in the latter style there is often a mere repetition of the same arrangement ; repetition without unity of design. One canopy seems to rest upon the pinnacles of another, if the light is tall enough to admit two or more ranges of figui'es, and the same is repeated through the whole breadth of the window. In the Cinque Cento style one grand architectural design pervades the whole, forming an appropriate frame-work to each subject, and while it keeps them sufficiently distinct, ranges them in a manner into one composition. If we would adopt Gothic, instead of classical details, the Easter sepulchre to which we have alluded, and other monumental compositions, will aflTord excellent suggestions. Perhaps we ought not to anticipate any objection so frivolous as that the preference of late to early models has a tendency to introduce a style of pagan, rather than Christian art. Yet the earnestness with which the dis- tinction is often dwelt upon, may justify a few remarks on the subject. It seems evident, that unless we can learn to judge of styles, whether of architecture or of decoration, solely by their own merits, and without the influence of any superstitious prejudice, we shall never succeed in a true revival of art. An ancient example (it is true) will always possess in itself an intrinsic value and interest ; and if it be a work of Christian art, it has an additional and still higher claim upon our respect ; but the mere exist- ence of such monuments, irrespective of their excellence, is no valid reason for the adoption of the style to which they belong. If indeed we had any ' style coeval with the first introduction, or with the general establishment, of Christianity, and if such style were continued without much change or inter- ruption, for many centuries, no doubt it would have a very strong claim ; we should scarcely perhaps be justified in seeking any other for religious purposes ; but we have reason to believe that the first ecclesiastical edifices were far more analogous to so-called pagan, than to so-called Christian structures ; and continued so during the earliest and perhaps the purest ages of the Church ; and also that the Christian styles sprang imperceptibly from the pagan, constantly adopting some new, or rejecting some old feature, and not altogether casting away even the most important ones, however much they may have been changed in their proportions or destina- tions ; as for instance the column with its base, shaft, capital and abacus. Nor again did the revival of classical art betoken any lapse into pagan superstition ; an arrangement of churches was preserved equally suitable to Christian forms of worship. The Grecian temple did not take place of the Gothic cathedral; indeed a building of altogether a new genus was . struck out, combining the severe simplicity of classical architecture with