DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.6914#0109
OPINIONS OF R. KNIGHT AND T. RICKMAN. 77
^wkesbury,' conceives that the varieties of style in our ancient buildings " rather
S'ew out of each other, according to the advancement of the nation in wealth, in
science, and in taste, instead of their having, severally, had a distinct origin, and
eing each of them sui generis." He proceeds to sustain this opinion by the
0 lowing argument:—" Instead of the reveries of fancy there is a consistent chain
^ deduction in supposing that the Romans, having expelled [subjugated?] the
_tl ons, might have handed down to the earliest colonists whom they left behind,
^^kvious uses of the arch, exhibited in all their structures, which the Saxons
aU '^ly copied—that the Normans, after successive dynasties having obtained
possession of the kingdom, would build on a grander scale, in proportion as they
GCaine m°i'e opulent and refined ; and that, finally, the Pointed arch would recom-
en<^ itself to the adoption of a people studious of improvement, as the rudiments of
eie continually before their eyes, in the intersection of those circular arches
^ Uc i had been employed, in earlier times, to relieve the heavy appearance of the
^ s- Saxon, Norman, and Gothic architecture often differ as much inter se, as
t\x^ ^rom each other, and in many cases are so interwoven and blended with it,
^ Jt's almost impossible to ascertain a line of demarcation between them."22
te• ^ ^^omas Hiclcma,is " Attempt to discriminate the Styles of English Archi-
^ ure (which has been already referred to in page 38), an elaborate endeavour
as been made to ascertain and classify the peculiar characteristics of our ancient
By foliaged tracery combined ;
Thou wouldst have thought some fairy's hand,
Twixt poplars straight, the ozier wand
In many a freakish knot had twined ;
Then framed a spell, when the work was done,
And chanfred the willow w7reaths to stone.
11 V'd i,
^ 1 e " Disquisition," &c. pp. 7—11, 1818, 8vo. Speaking- particularly of Tewkesbury, the sam<
says, " Besides the Pointed arch formed from the intersection of semicircular arches, the niche, the
re 00 c' aml the buttress are more than shadowed out in the oldest parts of Tewkesbury Church ; the
hi J, 6 °f t1le can°pied Virgin over the entrance of the porch, renewed probably after a design of much
°f th6' antlf!U'ty' nas an obvious amnity to the first of these ; the pinnacle is to be traced round the turrets
side of"eStern %ade ; and incipient buttresses, certainly of no great projection, are discoverable on each
to tli° tlle ano'es of the tower ; these last crowned with pinnacles, which give them a still closer resemblance
those S6 WhlCl1 after times were more generally adopted." Here then we find " the germ of many of
ado .PeCU,larities which are often ascribed to the invention of those who deserve only the praise of
g» multiplying, and improving them in the progress of ecclesiastical architecture." Ibid. p. 37.
^wkesbury,' conceives that the varieties of style in our ancient buildings " rather
S'ew out of each other, according to the advancement of the nation in wealth, in
science, and in taste, instead of their having, severally, had a distinct origin, and
eing each of them sui generis." He proceeds to sustain this opinion by the
0 lowing argument:—" Instead of the reveries of fancy there is a consistent chain
^ deduction in supposing that the Romans, having expelled [subjugated?] the
_tl ons, might have handed down to the earliest colonists whom they left behind,
^^kvious uses of the arch, exhibited in all their structures, which the Saxons
aU '^ly copied—that the Normans, after successive dynasties having obtained
possession of the kingdom, would build on a grander scale, in proportion as they
GCaine m°i'e opulent and refined ; and that, finally, the Pointed arch would recom-
en<^ itself to the adoption of a people studious of improvement, as the rudiments of
eie continually before their eyes, in the intersection of those circular arches
^ Uc i had been employed, in earlier times, to relieve the heavy appearance of the
^ s- Saxon, Norman, and Gothic architecture often differ as much inter se, as
t\x^ ^rom each other, and in many cases are so interwoven and blended with it,
^ Jt's almost impossible to ascertain a line of demarcation between them."22
te• ^ ^^omas Hiclcma,is " Attempt to discriminate the Styles of English Archi-
^ ure (which has been already referred to in page 38), an elaborate endeavour
as been made to ascertain and classify the peculiar characteristics of our ancient
By foliaged tracery combined ;
Thou wouldst have thought some fairy's hand,
Twixt poplars straight, the ozier wand
In many a freakish knot had twined ;
Then framed a spell, when the work was done,
And chanfred the willow w7reaths to stone.
11 V'd i,
^ 1 e " Disquisition," &c. pp. 7—11, 1818, 8vo. Speaking- particularly of Tewkesbury, the sam<
says, " Besides the Pointed arch formed from the intersection of semicircular arches, the niche, the
re 00 c' aml the buttress are more than shadowed out in the oldest parts of Tewkesbury Church ; the
hi J, 6 °f t1le can°pied Virgin over the entrance of the porch, renewed probably after a design of much
°f th6' antlf!U'ty' nas an obvious amnity to the first of these ; the pinnacle is to be traced round the turrets
side of"eStern %ade ; and incipient buttresses, certainly of no great projection, are discoverable on each
to tli° tlle ano'es of the tower ; these last crowned with pinnacles, which give them a still closer resemblance
those S6 WhlCl1 after times were more generally adopted." Here then we find " the germ of many of
ado .PeCU,larities which are often ascribed to the invention of those who deserve only the praise of
g» multiplying, and improving them in the progress of ecclesiastical architecture." Ibid. p. 37.