Studio: international art (15.1899)

Textile Patterns

ornament, and were doubtless copied, in the first
place, from actual vestments in the treasury of
some ecclesiastical institution.

It is not possible to dismiss this subject without
a word on the possible symbolism of the devices
used. This, however, is dangerous ground for the
theorist. The temptation to argue back to apparent
origins and to discover hidden meanings in mere
coincidences is always great in ecclesiastical art,
and it must not be too easily encouraged. For
instance, in these very cases the lion in Figs. 2 and
3 might well suggest the Lion of Judah—and it is
always possible that the selection of it by the old
monks for the purpose may have been influenced
by some such consideration — if the travelling
craftsman gave them a set of patterns to choose
from. But when it is taken in connection with the
hunting subjects of purely secular nature, one sees
the weakness of the theory. And a study of early
Persian ornament in which similar scenes abound
gives a much easier and more satisfactory solution
of the question. The spaniel in Fig. 3 certainly
suggests a touch of local colour. Similarly, with
the floral ornament, the Fruitful Vine and the split
pomegranate were assuredly used in early Christian

FIG. 10.—DIAPER ON THE ALB OF
ST. ANDREW. SOUTHWOLD SCREEN

and exported to the
Eastern Counties to be
there fitted into their
places. But in the two
instances under consider-
ation the decoration of
the constructive portions
of the screens shows such
unity that the whole must
have been done at one
time, though, doubtless,
by an artist of Nether-
landish nationality.

We must, however, bear
in mind that the patterns
belong historically to the
earlier period. They have

little or nothing in com- ^ ^TV*—>«^# "'"V^N-^ * ^/^TV--"* V~>

mon with contemporary

246 FIG' "'—DETAIL FROM RAND WORTH SCREEN