1

devoted an entire chapter to the subject, but his views are fairly summarized in the following passage: "He [Viollet-leDuc] has given a profound and exhaustive illustration of Gothic. He has shown that this architecture consists primarily in a peculiar structural system, - a system which was a gradual evolution out of the arched Roman through the Romanesque, and that its distinctive characteristic is that the whole scheme of the building is determined by, and its whole strength is made to reside in, a finely organized and frankly confessed framework rather than walls. This framework, made up of piers, arches, and buttresses, is freed from every unnecessary encumbrance of wall, and is rendered as light in all its parts as is compatible with strength the strength of the fabric depending not upon inert massiveness (except in the outermost abutments) but upon a logical adjustment of active parts, whose opposing forces neutralize each other and produce a perfect equilibrium. It is a system of balanced thrusts in contradistinction to the ancient system of inert stability. Gothic architecture is such a system carried out in a finely artistic spirit. It is, indeed, much more than this, but it is this primarily and always. So fundamental and far reaching is this peculiar mode of construction as the distinctive principle of Gothic, that it may be taken as a rule, that, wherever we find it developed, there we have a Gothic building, even though the ornamental elements connected with it may retain many Romanesque characteristics; while on the other hand, wherever a framework maintained on the principle of thrust and counter thrust is wanting, there we have not Gothic, however freely the ornamental elements may differ from the Romanesque.'

For clearness and precision, it would be impossible to improve on this definition of Mr. Moore's; but, unfortunately, such a classification excludes certain buildings that have, time out of mind, enjoyed the appellation of Gothic, indeed all the pointed edifices of England, Germany, Spain, and Italy, to say nothing of those timber-roofed churches of the Ile de France itself which are in age and ornament of the self-same style as the buildings acknowledged Gothic. Consequently, Mr. Moore's 1 Chapter I of his Gothic Architecture. The passage quoted is taken from pp. 7–8.

1

definition, excellent as it is, has won but little acceptance, and has had as its chief result the stirring up of a vast amount of indignation among the admirers of English cathedrals, who consider it nothing less than an insult to the old minsters to refuse them the time-honored epithet Gothic.

I have, therefore, reluctantly concluded to abandon Mr. Moore's definition of the word which I shall employ in the loose meaning in which it is generally understood, to designate that architecture which grew up in the Ile de France at the end of the XII century and all other styles directly thence derived. It should be once for all emphatically stated that the old definition which makes the pointed arch the essential characteristic of Gothic, is not only erroneous but positively misleading. What the true nature and characteristics of Gothic architecture were, are clearly summarized in the passage above quoted from Mr. Moore; and I hope they will be made familiar to the reader of this and of the succeeding chapter.

Just where the line is to be drawn between the transitional and Gothic periods must, in consequence, like the term Gothic itself, remain vague. Generally speaking, however, we may consider the Gothic period to begin when the new principles had gained the mastery, and the old Romanesque elements had entirely disappeared. This era dawned with the construction of the choir of Paris, c. 1163, although in other regions a parallel development was not reached until almost the end of the XII century.

The beginning of the transitional period is much easier to place, for it was signalized by the introduction of the rib vault into the Ile de France. That event, in all probability, occurred during the first ten years of the XII century, and we shall not be far out of the way in assigning it in round numbers to the year 1100.

This transitional period, extending thus approximately from 1100 to 1180, is divided into two nearly equal and distinct halves by the construction of the choir of the abbey church of St. Denis in 1140-44. The history of the first of these

1 St. Denis is, then, exactly at the middle point of the transition, and far from being, as has often been said by writers of the old school, the first of the transitional monuments.

halves -the first phase of the transition, as we may call it is still somewhat obscure, although recent researches have thrown a great and new light upon the subject. But unfortunately, not a single surely dated monument of the Ile de France, falling between the years 1100 and 1140, is known. The western portions of Chartres cathedral, it is true, are dated approximately, though the chronology of this puzzling structure has been the subject of much controversy; but these vaults were erected at the very end of the period and in a locality somewhat removed from the center of the transitional movement. M. Lefèvre-Pontalis believes that he has found a central date of support in the chapel at Bellefontaine; but as M. St. Paul has pointed out, the charter in question merely granted permission in 1125 to build the chapel, and the actual construction might have been carried out at any time subsequent to this date. The same objection applies to the church of Airaines, whose undated charter was signed by Thibaut, abbot from 1108-19. Relics were brought to Morienval in 1122, and M. St. Paul has supposed that it was in consequence of this circumstance that the famous ambulatory was built; but this argument has been warmly attacked by M. Lefèvre-Pontalis. For certain and unquestionable, therefore, we have only the state of architecture as it was at the end of the XI century this state, as has been seen in the preceding chapter, being well established by authentically dated structures - and the state at which it arrived in 1140-44.

Now between these two types stand a crowd of undated monuments showing every intermediate stage of the transformation, and, if it once be granted that the transition progressed by uniform and gradual steps, it is possible, by careful study and comparison, to assign each of these monuments to the position it should occupy in the logical development of the style. Many archaeologists have attempted this delicate task with varying success; notably, M. Lefèvre-Pontalis has assigned dates to the monuments of the XII century in the diocese of Soissons in so plausible a manner, that it is beyond all reasonable doubt that we have beneath our eyes the entire process of evolution. However, it must be candidly recognized that these

assigned dates offer several difficulties. Architectural progress always describes, not a smooth curve, but a wavy line. Certain buildings are inevitably in advance, as others are behind, their time; strange archaic features will often appear ten, twenty, fifty years after improvements have been discovered and generally adopted. Also it is not at all unlikely that progress may have been much more rapid at certain times—for example, the last part of the period than at others, that advance may have been made, so to speak, in an arithmetical progression. Thus all these assigned dates must be understood to be relative and somewhat arbitrary, and the exact time and manner of the evolution of certain details must remain in doubt. None the less, the broad outlines of the transitional movement must he held to be clearly and indubitably established.

Of all the facts which these modern studies have demonstrated, the fundamental importance of the rib vault is the most vital. Here is the key which gives transitional architecture its meaning, Gothic architecture its existence; here the principle on which was more or less completely founded all the architectural history of the later Middle Ages. During the transitional period, in especial, the rib vault was all important; it was the cause from which all else followed. Other changes were purely incidental or followed as direct consequences of the development of this all essential feature. It is clear, therefore, that any study of the transitional period must commence with the study of the rib vault.

The history of this construction falls naturally into two distinct phases, corresponding to the two halves into which the history of the style is divided. During the first phase of the transition, 1100-40, the builders struggled to master the rib vault in its simpler problems; they learned to construct it on square and on oblong plans, and even over the awkward curves of ambulatories, but their experiments were always on a small scale. During the second phase (1140-80) the problem of vaulting great naves was attacked; the evolution centers in the peculiar development which the genius of the French builders gave to the concealed flying buttress and to the sexpartite vault, both borrowed from Normandy. In the following pages I

shall try to trace the development of the rib vault in these two periods successively.

To say that Gothic architecture originated on the soil of the Ile de France, has become almost a commonplace. The country which we call roughly the royal domain, however, was in the XII century divided architecturally into several sub-schools, differing slightly from one another, but all showing, in somewhat divergent ways, the same progress towards the same goal. Which of these sub-schools was the creative influence has recently been the subject of much controversy. M. Lefèvre-Pontalis, who on the whole carries off the honors, claims this distinction for the school which flourished in the ancient diocese of Soissons, along the valleys of the Aisne and Oise. M. Enlart sees the formative influence even outside the borders of the Ile de France, in Picardy and the diocese of Amiens, and especially in those lands included in the present département of Somme. Another widely accepted view is that long ago advanced by M. Woillez, the first of the long line of scholars to specialize in this period - a view which sees the cradle of Gothic in the district forming the ancient diocese of Beauvais, and roughly corresponding to the present département of Oise. Less convincing is the thesis of M. St. Paul who looks farther to the west, to the region comprised between Paris and the Norman border.

In which of these four sub-schools the rib vault first made its appearance can probably never be proved, nor is it a matter of essential importance. The vital fact is that it did appear somewhere. Once discovered, it seems to have been adopted and developed with almost common enthusiasm by the three sub-schools of Soissons, Amiens, and Beauvais. It is probable that no one of these three centers was exclusively the formative influence during the transitional period; all, indeed, formed parts of an essential whole, all contributed to the common progress. One adjustment developed and was advanced more rapidly in one, another in another. Yet the three were never far separated. Any material progress scored in the valley of the Aisne was sure to make its way without long delay to the banks of the Somme and to the Beauvoisis. Thus, while the