Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 2.djvu/466

Rh 422 AECHITECTUEE [POINTED. POINTED ARCHITECTURE. In those countries which, received the Christian religion from Rome, but which did not contain such mines of archi tectural material in temples, amphitheatres, and palaces, as Italy did, and, indeed, in the remoter parts of Italy itself, which did not contain them as Rome did, churches were constructed in imitation of those of the metropolis of the Christian world. These being the work of a semi- barbarous and unpolished people, were of necessity com paratively rude, and from them arose the Gothic archi tecture of the Middle Ages, not from any previously existing style of architecture among the northern nations who overran Italy and subverted the Roman power, the rude Celtic monuments being the only specimens of archi tecture they possessed. The transitional style of archi tecture referred to will be found in what are called the Saxon and Norman buildings of England, and to a greater or less extent in all .parts of Europe in which the Romans had been masters, and particularly in those which adhered to the Roman communion in the great divi sion of the churches. The general forms and modes of arrangement peculiar to Roman architecture may be traced throughout; in some specimens they are more and in others less obvious, but the leading features are the same. This is more evident in Italy than elsewhere. In the early Roman basilicas and churches, some of which are of the age of Constantino, and which were constructed in the Roman style, the first divergencies occur; in those which are later they are still greater, and distance of time and place appears still to have increased them, till what may be called a new style was formed, having peculiari ties of its own, but even more clearly deducible from its origin than Roman is from Greek or Greek from Egyptian. The variation in the development from the parent stock is great, but in all cases there is more or less evidence of the descent. It must bs noted, however, that there was one important modification of Roman art, and this was the Jloman art modified by contact with the East, and known commonly as Byzantine. Its influence was felt first and most strongly in St Mark s, Venice, a building which is entirely Byzantine in style as opposed to Romanesque. From Venice it was copied in Perigueux in the church of .St Front, and this copy influenced the style of a vast number of buildings in the south-west of France. St Mark s, again, had a great influence on the Lombard works of Northern Italy, and these were the originals from which Germany, by way of the valley of the Rhine, derived all its mediaeval buildings. To the greater part of France and to England the stream of art was much more purely Romanesque, being the result of knowledge of genuine Roman art, with little, if any, influence from the East In Spain we see the direct influence of the Romans, the direct influence of the Arab, and the indirect Byzantine influence of the south-west of France, all materially affecting the development of the national architecture. As might be expected, this style was not the same in all the countries which practised it ; it was derived, in them all, from the s.une source, as we have shown, but was materially influenced by the habits, manners, and state of civilisation of the various nations, and much, too, by their means of communication with Rome. This, in strictness, may be railed Gothic architecture, as it was partly induced by the Gothic invasions of Italy, and was invariably practised by the nations to whom that term may with propriety be applied. It arose in the 4th century, and was subverted in the 12th by the invention or introduction of the pointed arch, which marks a new era, and was destined to give birth to a new stylo in architecture. L Where, when, and with whom the pointed form origin ated has been more discussed and disputed than the dis covery of the properties of the arch itself. Some have contended that it was suggested by the intersections of semicircular arches, as they were employed in ornament ing the fronts of edifices in the preceding style ; some, that groined arches of the same form gave the idea ; others have referred it to the interlacing of the branches of trees when planted in parallel rows,- to an imitation of wicker- work, to a figure used on conventual seals, to the principle of the pyramid, to Noah s ark, to chance. Such a mass of conflicting opinions, almost all supported by some show of reason, and more or less by evidence, may be called a proof of the impossibility of determining the question. There is one striking fact, however, which has been overlooked by many of the theorists in the discussion of the question; it is, that the pointed arch made its appearance almost at the same moment of time in all the civilised countries of Europe. This is proved by the controversies of those who claim its invention for their respective nations ; for none of them can produce genuine specimens of it before a certain period, to which they can all reach. Now, if it had been invented in any of the European nations, that one would certainly have been able to show specimens of it of a date considerably anterior to some of the others ; for though it might by chance have been soon communicated to any one of them, the impro bability is great that it would immediately have reached them all, and have been at once adopted by all, .to the subversion of their previously practised forms of construc tion. The infrequent and imperfect modes of communi cation between the different countries of Europe at tho period referred to, furnish another reason why it is not probable that a discovery of the kind should travel rapidly from one to another. Considering these things, and particularly the fact of the almost simultaneous introduction of the pointed arch to the various nations of Europe, as it appears by their monuments immediately after the first Crusade, in which they all bore a part, connected with existing evidence that it was commonly used in the East at and anterior to that period, the most rational and satisfactory theory seems to be that a knowledge of it wa.^ acquired by the Crusaders in the Holy Land, and brought home to their respective countries by them. In Europe there are found rude approaches to the pointed form in some of the earlier. Gothic structures ; but we believe it may be safely asserted that nothing can be indicated of u date beyond that of the first Crusade, approaching the simple but perfect lancet arch, which, it is not denied, came into use immediately after that period ; whereas tolerably well- authenticated examples of it are found in the East, of sufficient antiquity to induce the opinion that it was at that time imported thence. It is, moreover, indisputable that the Saracenic or Mahometan nations, who were never known in those times to adopt any European custom or invention of any kind, do use, and have used, the pointed arch. It was very extensively employed in various parts of Asia, and nowhere in more sumptuous edifices or with greater effect than &quot;in the structures erected by the Maho metan conquerors of India. With what nation of the East, and in what manner, the pointed arch originated, are prob lems equally difficult to solve. We have not been able to discover that the properties of the arch were known to the Egyptians or to the Greeks, and there is no evidence to show that they were known to the Persians or to the Indians of ancient times ; but structures are found in the countries of those nations in which chambers are domed, and apertures covered with a pointed arch, produced, however, by gathering or corbelling over, and not by arched structure. It is not improbable, therefore, that, such things existing, when the properties of the arch be