of Saxon churches in the seventh century." The arches, Mr. Millers describes as being, "frequently very plain-sometimes decorated with various sorts of mouldings, not only on the face, but in the soffit, which, in some instances (as in the ruins at Ely) is entirely occupied by them-double, triple, or quadruple, each resting on two columns, and generally faced with a different moulding, which is frequently double; so that, upon the whole, there are six or eight concentric semicircles of them; and, as each semicircle projects somewhat beyond the next, a moulding is placed under the projecting parts, usually the same as that upon the face of it.” After noticing the various shapes of columns supposed to be Saxon, the same writer mentions them as being "strong and short, in proportion to the span of the arch-the circumference often equal to the height-the capitals indented with fissures of different lengths, forms, and directions; the divisions thus formed, variously sloped off, or hollowed out towards the top-sometimes decorated with rude imitations of some correspondent member, of a Grecian order, as leaves, or volutes-and in these ornaments much, and even sportive, variety is displayed; only opposite ones being commonly alike." The windows, according to Mr. Millers, "are sometimes so very small, that they are rather narrow loops than windows, about three feet high, and six or eight inches wide, expanding inwards through the thickness of the wall. The roof, vaulted. The very few remains of Saxon vaulting" (says Mr. Millers) are mostly in crypts, as at York and Winchester." As to ornaments, "the Saxon churches seem to have been bare of decoration, excepting what has been before mentioned to have been sometimes, even profusely, bestowed on the arches and columns.' Mr. King has devoted to a consideration of Anglo-Saxon ec Description of the Cathedral church of Ely, &c. by George Millers, M. A. Article "Characteristics of the Saxon style." clesiastical architecture, the fourth volume of his large and costly work, intituled Munimenta Antiqua. It would appear that this writer is chiefly valuable, as an investigator and a guide, when exploring the castellated remains of antiquity, and presenting the fruits of a research, where prepossession, and an over-ruling zeal, have little opportunity of exercise. There is reason to fear that his fancy prevailed over his judgment, to the serious injury of his undertaking, when he directed his attention to the ecclesias tical architecture of those obscure ages which preceded the Norman conquest. A brief exposition of his notions, respecting the gradations of style which he believes to be evinced by remaining Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastical buildings, and the characteristical marks of each determinate mode, is presented in the following words, which act as a sort of corollary to this portion of this work. "It may be observed, as a new, and though obvious, yet hitherto unnoticed, circumstance, that Saxon Ecclesiastical Architecture may, most justly, be considered as having had three very different stages, and periods of its existence; namely: 1. The early Saxon, or dawning Saxon. 3. The declining Saxon, or last Saxon; liable to be "And the criteria, by which buildings, belonging to these several periods, may be distinguished, are very remarkable. "The first, and earliest Saxon architecture, in churches, draws our attention by the multitude of the minute, and designedly varied ornaments, of the several parts.-A characteristic specimen of which may be seen in Barfreston church, in Kent. "The second kind, appears more bold, and in a more noble style, with less numerous ornaments:—but still with much variety in the adornments;-of which there are most striking instances, in the cathedral of Christ church, in Oxford;-and in Canute's great Gate at St. Edmund's Bury, in Suffolk. "And the third, and last kind, is manifested, both by its clumsy, stately magnificence, on a greater scale, and in greater proportions; and by its having cast off so much of varied ornament, that it is difficult to be distinguished from the first plain Norman; saving that the first Norman had still larger proportions. And the specimens at Southwell, and Waltham, are suf ficident to elucidate this fact. "The first species of Saxon Architecture, continued from the conversion of Egbert, King of Kent, about A. D. 598; and from the first building of Archbishop Theodore's churches; to the time of King Alfred, about A. D. 872. "The second species of Saxon Architecture, continued from the days of Alfred, through those of King Canute; and till the time of the first Harold, about 1036. "And the last species of Saxon Architecture, continued from that time, to the Conquest."* It is almost superfluous to observe, that the above bold classifi cation of styles is ingenious rather than useful, since it rests upon a presumptive appropriation of dates to specified buildings, concerning the real time of whose erection we do not possess legitimate intelligence. Some minute criteria for distinguishing the architecture of the Anglo-Saxons (according to the system of Mr. King) are scattered through various pages of the same laborious work. The principal of these are subjoined; but it will be obvious that they are, in the greater part, liable to a similar objection with his division of supposed Anglo-Saxon structures into regular classes. Mr. King considers the primary mark of distinction, between most churches of Saxon and Norman architecture, to consist in the comparatively small dimensions of the former, not only as to general ground-plan, but in regard to the proportions of the doors and windows. He, also, believes the Anglo-Saxon architects to be deficient in elegance of design; and the masons to be less skilful in execution. T3 • Munimenta Antiqua, Vol. IV. p. 241–242. The 1 The following peculiarities are noticed by him, as affording characteristical distinctions of early Saxon arches. "1. A studied diversity of ornament, in the capitals of the supporting pillars, on each side the arch; instead of exact uniformity. « 2. A transom stone, (or transom stones,) most usually filling up the semi-circular part of the arch, as if to support it on the inside; and generally resting on the pillars at the two ends. "3. The supporting pillars, placed standing inwards, and somewhat nearer to each other than the whole diameter of the arch; and so as to support, with their capitals, both the inward transom stone, as well as the ends of the arch. "4. A loaded variety of ornaments, on the mouldings of the arch; and often in very small compartments.—And a great variety of mouldings, besides the indented moulding. "5. Yet, in general, a very plain simple kind of impost moulding, resting on the capitals of the pillars, for the support of the arch."'* Mr. King adds, that "all these five peculiarities are sometimes (though not often) found united together in the same doorcase, or window; and are, ever, so truly characteristic, that hardly any Saxon doorway is found without one or two of them combined." He does not, however, contend that these peculiar ornaments continued invariably to be used, "just in the same sort of fashion, quite till the Norman conquest; or that, immediately afterwards, they went entirely out of use. Now-and-then, they were somewhat imitated by the Normans; but in such a manner, that they may easily be distinguished by a discerning eye; both by the larger proportion of the several parts, and by an evident introduction of corresponding ornaments, on each side, instead of the Saxon diversity.” Confident in his appropriation of styles, Mr. King presents the following long catalogue of "Saxon mouldings." Of these, he says, "that only the plainest, and most simple, and, in general, • Munimenta Antiqua, Vol. IV. p. 78-79 only 1 only the cheveron zig-zag, or the triple indented moulding, were ever imitated, or at all used, by the Normans." The double-leaf moulding. The triple indented moulding. The enriched triangular mould- The embattled frette moulding. The enriched lozenge, or enrich ed frette moulding. The rose moulding. The trefoil leaf moulding. The scroll foliage moulding. The nail head moulding. The double billet moulding. The crossed circle moulding. The enriched quaterfoil moulding. The head moulding. The heart moulding. As a necessary appendage to this section of our enquiries, I submit an enumeration of the principal churches, and parts of ecclesiastical buildings, (independent of door-cases) which many writers are accustomed to ascribe to the Anglo-Saxons. These supposed examples are chiefly selected from Dr. Ducarel's AngloNorman Antiquities; Mr. King's Munimenta Antiqua (volume fourth ;) Mr. Turner's History of the Anglo-Saxons; Mr. Carter's Ancient Architecture; and the Archæologia. Avington church, BERKS. Stewkly church, BUCKINGHAMSHIRE. Dinton church, Bucks. Remains of the Conventual church Ꭲ 4 • Munimenta Antiqua, Vol. IV. p. 84–85. A plate, containing delineations of these mouldings, is given in Munimenta Antiqua, Vol. IV. |