Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 7.djvu/230

 15-i ANGLO-SAXON REMAINS IN IVER CHURCH, BUCKS. built in the same manner as before,^ with such shght improve- ments as they might have learned in the Norman works." He then goes on to mention — I presume from historical evidence — the Saxon churches of Lincoln as having been built after the Conquest by the English inhabitants dispos- sessed of their dwellings in the upper city by William and Bishop Rcmigius. No fact could be more acceptable to the believers in a distinct Saxon style : if the Englishmen of Lincoln continued, even when the Norman Cathedral was rising immediately over their heads, to build in a manner, not difiering merely as ruder work from more finished, but having essentially distinct characters of its own, the inference is irresistible that this was but the continuation of a really distinct style, which, in those larger edifices which have been almost wholly lost to us, would probably present distinctive features still more indisputable. The mere chronological proof of any existing building being older than the Conquest could never have half the same value as such a testimony as this, which represents Saxon and Norman architecture co-existing in antagonistic juxta- position. The fact is, how- ever, only the same as we find occurring, to a greater or less extent, at eveiy change of style. At all such transitional periods we find not only every conceivable intermediate stage, but the sinmltancous use of the two styles, each in a state of tolerable purity. And the circumstances which attended the change from Saxon to Norman architecture would naturally tend to make this phccnomenon more con- spicuous than in subsequent transitions. This change was no native develoj:)ment ; it was the innovation, not only of foreigners, but of conquerors and oppressors ; and while national honour might require, the circumstances of the time would compel, the rude and obscure structures which still continued to be raised by Englishmen to adhere in all respects to the native precedents of better times. Wealth, art, ecclesiastical influence and munificence, were all enlisted on the side of their tyrants. Under these circumstances, however, though the native style may have been fondly adhered to, it was no wonder ' These words clearly imply the exist- a latent fallacy, as if the fact that some ence of an earlier Anf,'lo-Saxoii style, which were later than lOGfi, proved that none was Kini])iy continued in the structures were earlier. But by his own showing, raised soon after the Conquest. But the these buildings are Saxon in stijle, even writer's argument is rather affected by if none of them are in date.