DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.26747#0046
xlii
INTRODTJCTION.
lieiglit of the central aisle by dividing its sides into three eqnal portions
(as in woodcuts No. 490 and 507), which hy contrast added very nmch
to the effect; hut the monotony of this arrangement was soon apparent:
hesides, it was perceived that the side aisles were so
low as not to come into direct comparison with the cen-
tral nave. To remedy this they gradually increased its
dimensions, and at last hit on something very lihe the
following proportions. They made the height of the
side aisle half that of the central (the width heing also
in the same proportion) ; the remaining portions they
divided into three, making the triforium one-third, the
clerestory two-thirds of the whole. Thus the three divi-
sions are in the proportion of 1, 2, and 3, each giving
value to the other, and the whole adding very consider-
ahly to all the apparent dimensions of the interior. It
wordd have heen easy to have carried the system further,
and hy increasing the numher of the pillars longitudi-
nally, and the numher of divisions vertically, to have
added considerably to even this appearance of size; hut
it would then have heen at the expense of simplicity
and grandeur; and though the huilding might have
looked larger, the heauty of the design would have heen
destroyed.
One of the most striking exemplifications of the perfection of the
Gothic architects in this department of their art is shown in their
employment of towers and spires. As a general rule, placing a tall
huilding in juxtaposition with a low one exaggerates the height of the
one and the lowness of the other; and as it was hy no means the
ohject of the architects to sacrifice their churches for their towers, it
required all their art to raise nohle spires without doing this. In
the hest designs they effected it hy hold huttresses helow, and the
moment the tower got free of the huilding, hy changing it to an octa-
gon, and cutting it up hy pinnacles, and lastly hy changing its form
into that of a spire, using generally smaller parts than are found in
the church. By these devices they prevented the spire from com-
peting in any way with the church. On the contrary, a spire or
group of spires gave dignity and height to the whole design, without
deducting from any of its dimensions.
The city of Paris contains an instructive exemplification of these
doctrines—the facade of the cathedral of Notre Dame (exclusive of
the upper story of the tower) and the Arc de l’Etoile heing two
buiklings of exactly the same dimensions; yet any one who is not
aware of this fact would certainiy estimate the dimensions of the
cathedral as at least a third, if not a half, in excess of the other.
It may he said that the arch gains in suhlimity and grandeur what it
loses in apparent dimensions hy the simplicity of its parts. The
faqade, though far from one of the hest in France, is hy no means
deficient in grandeur; and liad it heen as free from the trammels of
utilitarianism as the arch, might easily have heen made as simplc, and
No. III.
INTRODTJCTION.
lieiglit of the central aisle by dividing its sides into three eqnal portions
(as in woodcuts No. 490 and 507), which hy contrast added very nmch
to the effect; hut the monotony of this arrangement was soon apparent:
hesides, it was perceived that the side aisles were so
low as not to come into direct comparison with the cen-
tral nave. To remedy this they gradually increased its
dimensions, and at last hit on something very lihe the
following proportions. They made the height of the
side aisle half that of the central (the width heing also
in the same proportion) ; the remaining portions they
divided into three, making the triforium one-third, the
clerestory two-thirds of the whole. Thus the three divi-
sions are in the proportion of 1, 2, and 3, each giving
value to the other, and the whole adding very consider-
ahly to all the apparent dimensions of the interior. It
wordd have heen easy to have carried the system further,
and hy increasing the numher of the pillars longitudi-
nally, and the numher of divisions vertically, to have
added considerably to even this appearance of size; hut
it would then have heen at the expense of simplicity
and grandeur; and though the huilding might have
looked larger, the heauty of the design would have heen
destroyed.
One of the most striking exemplifications of the perfection of the
Gothic architects in this department of their art is shown in their
employment of towers and spires. As a general rule, placing a tall
huilding in juxtaposition with a low one exaggerates the height of the
one and the lowness of the other; and as it was hy no means the
ohject of the architects to sacrifice their churches for their towers, it
required all their art to raise nohle spires without doing this. In
the hest designs they effected it hy hold huttresses helow, and the
moment the tower got free of the huilding, hy changing it to an octa-
gon, and cutting it up hy pinnacles, and lastly hy changing its form
into that of a spire, using generally smaller parts than are found in
the church. By these devices they prevented the spire from com-
peting in any way with the church. On the contrary, a spire or
group of spires gave dignity and height to the whole design, without
deducting from any of its dimensions.
The city of Paris contains an instructive exemplification of these
doctrines—the facade of the cathedral of Notre Dame (exclusive of
the upper story of the tower) and the Arc de l’Etoile heing two
buiklings of exactly the same dimensions; yet any one who is not
aware of this fact would certainiy estimate the dimensions of the
cathedral as at least a third, if not a half, in excess of the other.
It may he said that the arch gains in suhlimity and grandeur what it
loses in apparent dimensions hy the simplicity of its parts. The
faqade, though far from one of the hest in France, is hy no means
deficient in grandeur; and liad it heen as free from the trammels of
utilitarianism as the arch, might easily have heen made as simplc, and
No. III.