the figure will appear to stand above the ground; it is also exceedingly useful in forming the small ornaments on mouldings.

One of the most widely spread of all the modes of working gold is that of filagree. Now there are two descriptions of filagree. The first is formed of very small ribbons of gold laid on their edges, and soldered to a gold ground; these ribbons are disposed in curves and arches, and generally have their upper edge milled. A much thicker ribbon, with its edge punched or stamped into small beads, surrounds the whole composition. In the other description of filagree the ribbons are quite round -in fact, wires; the scrolls are much stronger, and more elaborate; minute balls or grains of gold are introduced to fill up the composition: and above all, there are often sundry parts which rise above the general surface, and break up the monotony. Altogether, this sort of filagree is richer and more varied than the other. The Hamilton filagree in the British Museum shows the first, and the filagree from Roach Smith's collection, now also in the British Museum, the second sort.1

In the latter half of the thirteenth century, a new developement took

place. Instead of joining small pieces of wire together, they cast small leaves and flowers with a tolerably long stalk: these were then put together like the ordinary filagree work; and the effect is quite as good, and infinitely more artistic. The ground was left free, and a coloured pallion introduced between it

and the filagree, so as to show up the latter.

Now, if we take the ribbon filagree, and pour enamels into the in. terstices, we shall have what antiquarians have agreed to call cloisonnée enamel it is thus that the King Alfred jewel,2 and the cross belonging to Mr. Beresford Hope, are made; only figures instead of scrolls have been formed by the ribbon. I am not aware that any attempt has been made to reproduce these enamels in the present day, except in the East, more especially in Persia, which country indeed appears to be the last refuge of the arts of the middle ages.3

A chalice at Pistoia is nearly covered with it. See Digby Wyatt's metal work, from a drawing by the author. Cellini gives directions for this sort of work in the Trattato dell' oreficeria, cap. iii.

2 See Shaw's Devices and Decorations of the Middle Ages.

3 For an account of the process as practised in Theophilus' time, see his Schedula diversarum Artium. In the bazaar at Constantinople, I saw specimens of nearly every sort of enamelling. The invariable answer to my inquiries was, that they all came from Persia.

These cloisonné enamels are always found distinct from the body of the work they ornament, and in fact are treated as gems.

Again, if we take a piece of metal, and scoop cavities in its surface by means of the burin, carefully leaving a thin strip of the metal to separate one cell from the other, and then pour in opaque enamels, we shall then have the second sort of enamel, called the champ levé. Every one is aware how there were great manufactures of this ware in France1 and Germany during the twelfth, thirteenth, and part of the fourteenth centuries; but it has always been in use from the earliest ages, and may dispute priority of date with the cloisonné. The Limoges artists hollowed out their copper very deeply,-say from one-eighth to one-sixteenth; but the goldsmiths, even when they worked in copper, were content with a very much less depth. This kind of enamelling is the more commonly used in the present day; but, unfortunately, the modern enamel, like the modern stained glass, is too good and too pure: the consequence is that it suffers dreadfully if compared with the old work. No successful attempt has been made, at all events in England, to put three or four colours in the same compartment, so as to get variety, as the old artists did; for in this sort of enamel the cells are larger than the cloisonné, and the whole effect of the work demands that the colours should be broken up.

The third species of enamels was due to the goldsmiths, who filled up the very shallow cells with transparent enamels, instead of opaque, working a diaper at the bottom of the cells, which shows through the enamels—as in the Lynn Cup. This kind of enamel obtained throughout Europe during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

The Italians, and afterwards the French, went a step further, and succeeded in covering the whole surface of a sunk and chased medallion with translucent enamels of various colours, without any intervening line. Of course this required the very greatest skill both in the chaser and the enameller, who, by the by, were generally the same man.5

It should be observed that the beautiful transparent red will not do on silver. Mr. Keith, I believe, always uses gold; but in every case in which I have seen it applied to silver, it has turned a dull, opaque, reddish brown. Mr. Hardman has, however, succeeded very fairly with it on silver; in fact, very much better than the ancients.

The last sort of enamelling to which I shall allude, consists in ap

1 Mr. Skidmore tells me that there is a great quantity of crystals of quartz to be found about Limoges, which served as the basis of the enamel. I always imagined that there must have been some local reason for the long continuance of the manufacture beyond the bare "Venetian traditions."

2 Another peculiarity of the Limoges school was, that when the ground was enamel, and the figure engraved, the real outline of the figure is within the metal outline.

3 The Lynn Cup has been published by John Carter, in his Ancient Painting and Sculpture.

4 Cellini gives an account of the production of these translucent enamels. Trattato dell' oreficeria, cap. iv.

5 It is needless to say that no one now-a-days works at "translucent enamels in relief."

plying opaque or transparent enamels on rounded surfaces, such as figures. Cellini gives the process, the principal point of which is, that the enamels were attached to the metal before firing by a glue made of pear-pips. The Beresford vase, now in the possession of Mr. Beresford Hope, is one of the very finest specimens of this sort of work, as indeed it is of all sorts of enamelling and jewellery. My friend, M. Didron, would call it a poem in Orfevrerie,

Enamel was often used to fill up engraved lines when they were sufficiently coarse; for the finer sort niello (a composition of sulphate of silver) was employed. Cellini and Theophilus give the whole process, but in vain as regards our workmen for when I wanted some executed a short time ago, I found that there was no one to do it here, and was told to go to Russia.

A most charming decoration was the enamel à jour, i.e. a cloisonné enamel, without the gold bottom, so that it could be seen right through. The last things I have to notice are jewels; a most important item in all the richer works of the Middle Ages. Theophilus tells us that when we want a good piece of goldsmith's work, our first care should be to collect as many jewels as possible. No one who has read Suger's account of the works carried on by him at S. Denis, can forget how earnestly he describes his embarrassment on account of the want of jewels for his great altar cross; or his deep gratitude when his prayers where answered by the arrival of three monks (he calls them angels in the shape of monks), with the remains of the rich vessels once the property of our King Henry I., from which he at last obtained his jewels. Now the jewels of the Middle Ages are almost always en cabochon, i.e. not cut into facets; they are generally set in a very projecting chaton or box, into which they are secured by strong points coming from the sides of the chaton and turning down upon them. These points are sometimes in the shape of a bird's claw, but sometimes the edge of the chaton is indented into a pattern and pressed down on the jewel. Jewels are sometimes set à jour, i.e, so that you can see right through them. Sometimes they are found sunk into the surface of the Limoges-work; but they are generally in strong chatons in exposed situations, and alternate with enamels, or are connected by filagree, and are never placed alone except they are in such numbers as to quite cover the ground, an occurrence which is very rare.

But as I have said before, they are generally employed in conjunction with filagree and enamel, and applied in strips around the covers of books, or the edges of the divisions of altars or dossels, or around certain parts of chalices or ewers; in fact these strips of jewels, and enamels, and filagree, are the great key to the decorations of the jewellery of the Middle Ages.

Of course I should mention that many of the smaller objects in a complicated piece of goldsmith's work would require to be cast; but

1 The Beresford vase has been published in the " Choice examples of art workmanship," 1851, but smaller than real size; the woodcut however gives an idea of the general form, but not of the workmanship. In fact a book might be written upon this one vase alone.

2 Theophilus, Sched. Div. Art. B. 3. Ch. 28.

Cellini, Tratt. dell' oref. cap. ii.

I think I need scarcely enlarge on that subject, seeing how very ready we are in the present day to cast every thing and any thing, The old men on the contrary were prodigal of their labour and sparing of their material; besides sundry objects were required to be made light, chalices and patens for instance. Of all the objects I propose treating on, the only things requiring casting are the candlesticks, and even they would be frequently wrought, especially if in silver. I should observe however, that I think the candlestick to be a perfectly legitimate field for the founder's art, inasmuch as it is required to be somewhat heavy as a counterpoise to the candle.

We come now to the consideration of the construction and shape of the altar furniture. The most important article is of course the chalice; and it is very curious to note how the chalices of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries are directly descended from the regular pagan vase; the Borghese or Farnese for example. The first modification is seen in the little vase found at Gourdon,1 where jewels supply the place of figures: we then get the chalice of S. Remi at Rheims, and the large chalice described by Theophilus,3 where the upper part dwindles down to a mere border of enamels and gems. The chalices of Suger, once in the Treasury of S. Denis, show us the same thing;4 but in the meanwhile almost all the other parts are developed and ornamented, more particularly the bowl and foot, which Theophilus orders to be beaten into the form of spoons, alternately nielloed and gilt. Such a one, but probably of a later date than that of Theophilus, is still to be seen in the Treasury of the cathedral at Augsburg. It has however no handles; but even in the time of Theophilus handles began to be optional, for he says, "should you wish to add handles to the chalice." In the smaller chalices of the thirteenth century we observe nearly the same peculiarities; the bowl becomes very shallow, much more so than a half-circle, and the edge turns over a little. The spoonlike projections have quite disappeared from the bowl, but are retained, although in a different shape, in the foot; thus, in the Chichester chalice they are trefoiled, and in the Troyes chalice they become pointed leaves. These however are far too small for our present requirements, being intended for one, or at the most three or four communicants.

The larger Italian chalices are I think far more applicable to our wants. Here we generally find the cup rather large, and of the form of the lower part of an egg. The spoons of Theophilus have

1 De Caumont, Abécédaire de l'Architecture, p. 53.

2 Transactions of Archæological Institute, vol. 3, p. 129. From a drawing by Albert Way, Esq.

3 Sched. Div. Art. lib. 3, cap. 27-43.

4 One of the chalices of Suger, together with the paten, are said by the compiler of the Catalogue du Cabinet des Medailles to be in the British Museum, having come to that institution with the Townly collection; I believe however that there is no truth whatever in the assertion. The chalices of Suger are figured in Felebien's Histoire de l'abbaye de S. Denis.

I am not aware if the Augsburg chalice has been published. Some years ago I gave a drawing of it to M. Didron, but he has not yet had it engraved.

6 See Annales Archéologiques, vol. 3, p. 206.

dwindled down into the scollop-shaped cup which receives the bowl, while the foiled shape of the foot is only indicative of them in that part. Probably the finest and largest medieval chalice is that at Mayence. This again would be an excellent model where a large chalice is required. Another one of nearly the same size as that at Mayence, is preserved at Monza, but is not so fine in design. With us in the latter part of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth centuries, the form of the bowl became a half sphere, and is stuck upon a high ungainly pipe, more or less decorated with buttresses and pinnacles of very questionable taste.3 I do not think that it is at all desirable that they should be imitated as they have been; but I hope, on the contrary, that we are gradually getting out of this fashion. Probably the very best form we could adopt would be the Italian chalice, with a very large bowl, foot and knob, and a very short pipe. Should the chalice be very large indeed, I really do not see why we should not revert to the ancient practice and employ handles; but perhaps upon the whole the modern custom of employing two chalices where there are many communicants, is the best and safest.

I have been enabled by the kindness of Mr. Beresford Hope (whose collection can hardly be called his own, so much is it at the disposal of his friends) to thoroughly examine an Italian chalice in his possession, and inasmuch as the pipe which connects all the pieces together is in rather a rickety condition, I have been enabled to ascertain its construction perfectly. First of all, there is the bowl of silver, for it was forbidden to employ wood, stone, or brass for this purpose.5 In the time of Theophilus this was beaten out of a flat piece of silver. In the present day the bowls of the chalices of Mr. Hardman are soldered up the sides. The shape is, as I have observed before, that of the lower part of an egg. To the bottom of this bowl is soldered an hexagonal copper tube which goes right down until it reaches the top part of the foot, it is then split and turned up against it in the present day a screw and nut is preferred. The bowl goes into a cup with a scalloped edge, this is sometimes enamelled, but in the present instance it is only engraved. At the bottom of the cup is a moulding which serves as a curb to the top of the pipe. The pipe is in two distinct parts, one above and another below the knob. The reason for this is that it is enamelled when flat, and it is consequently easier and involves less risk to bend two short

1 Published from a drawing of mine in Digby Wyatt's Metal Work of the Middle Ages.

The knob is full of spikey pinnacles, pediments, and crockets.

3 See the Leominster chalice, Archæologia, vol. xxxv. p. 489, from a drawing by Mr. Shaw.

4 The pipe in Dr. Rock's chalice is reduced to the height necessary for the inscriptions; the chalice does not look the worse for it.

5 The copper enamelled Limoges ware was excepted from this prohibition. A very beautiful chalice of this work is published in the last volume of the Sussex Collection it was found in a grave at Rusper-Priory.

6 Theophilus describes a pipe as attached to the bowl of his chalice, but it is not soldered but beaten out of the substance, a feat which I am assured by practical silversmiths is impossible if the bottom of the bowl is to be kept smooth as it ought to be. I am inclined to think the passage to be corrupt.