The Cathedral Builders Part 13

_See pages 137 and 257._]

If their churches are not enough, the civil architecture of that epoch also affords proof of Lombard influence in Germany. Compare the windows and style of the ancient dwelling-house at Cologne which Fergusson ill.u.s.trates, p. 590, with those of any Lombard building whatsoever, from the Palace of King Desiderius in the eighth century to the Bargello of Florence in the thirteenth, and you will find them identical. The only German innovation is in the high gabled roof.

Again, compare St. Elizabeth's home, the Castle on the Wartburg, with the ancient Communal Palace at Todi, or at Perugia, or other Lombard building of the twelfth century, and its genesis will at once be seen.[99]

Ferd. Pitou, author of the fine monograph on the Cathedral of Strasburg, confirms the presence of Italian builders in Germany, not only in the time of the Carlovingians and the line of Otho, but also in the later times of the Swabian dynasty. He says, when speaking of the works at Strasburg, that "colonies of artisans, chiefly sent from Lombardy and other parts, where church-building was prevalent, accompanied the monks and ecclesiastics who directed the work. These spiritual leaders, however, had all the glory of the buildings up to about the end of the twelfth century, when ogival architecture arose.

These Lombard colonies pushed on beyond the Rhine, to the Elbe, the Oder, and the Vistula, and even penetrated to the forests and lands of Sarmatia and Scythia."

There seems little doubt that the German lodges founded by the Comacine emigrations took root, and became in time entirely national.

Traditions are many, and most of them point back to Italy. For instance, legend says a brotherhood of stone-carvers existed in Spires and Bamberg from the time when those cathedrals were begun. Others say that Albertus Magnus on his return from Padua formed the first Masonic a.s.sociation in Germany, making special laws and obtaining especial privileges for the immense number of builders he collected to put into execution his cathedral at Cologne.[100] Again, L' Abbe de Grandidier, writing to a lady in November 1778, tells her that he has discovered an ancient doc.u.ment three centuries old, which shows that the much-boasted society of the Freemasons is nothing but a servile imitation of an ancient and humble confraternity of real builders whose seat was anciently in Strasburg. Hope, however, says that the Strasburg lodge, which was the earliest acknowledged German one, was first recognized by a legal act executed at Ratisbon in 1458, and that the Emperor Maximilian ratified and confirmed the act by a diploma given at Strasburg in 1498.

My theory is this, that in their early emigrations the Comacine Masters founded the usual lodges; that the Germans entered their schools and became masters in their turn; that in the end the German interest outweighed the foreign element in the brotherhood, and the Germans, wishing to nationalize an art which they had so greatly developed, split off from the universal Masonic a.s.sociation, as the Sienese builders did in Siena in the fourteenth century, and formed a distinct national branch: that this decisive break probably took place at Strasburg, and that other lodges followed suit and nationalized themselves in their turn. No doubt some German searcher into archives may arise, who will do for Cologne and Strasburg what Milanesi has done for Siena, and Cesare Guasti for Florence, and so throw light on the complicated organization of patrons, architects, builders, and sculptors which banded together under one rule, to build the multiplex and grand old cathedrals.

FOOTNOTES:

[96] See the Letters of Pope Gregory II., and Life of St. Boniface.

[97] Milman, _Latin Christianity_, Vol. II. chap. v. p. 302, Book IV.

[98] See ill.u.s.trations in Fergusson, pp. 578, 579.

[99] See ill.u.s.trations in Fergusson's _Handbook of Architecture_, pp.

589, 590.

[100] Merzario, _I Maestri Comacini_, Vol. I. chap. x. p. 282.

CHAPTER III

THE ORIGIN OF SAXON ARCHITECTURE (A SUGGESTION)

BY THE REV. W. MILES BARNES[101]

Wherever the Romans planted colonies, there they established _Collegia_; without its colleges Roman society was incomplete; the _Collegium_ was an element essential to Roman life.

The _Collegium_ was a corporation or guild of persons a.s.sociated in support of a common object; there were colleges of artists, of architects, builders, and artisans, as well as colleges a.s.sociated with the administration and government, with religion and law.

The _Collegium_ consisted of _Collegae_ or _sodales_ (fellows, as we should term them), with a president who was styled "_Magister_"; the _Collegium_ was recognized by the State, which confirmed the regulations made by the members for the government of their body, provided they were in conformity with the laws of the land. There is evidence that Roman _Collegia_ were established in Britain shortly after its conquest by the Romans, and there was certainly a _Collegium fabrorum_ in Britain in the reign of Claudius, the first Roman emperor to whom the island was subject. Under the direction of the Roman college, the Britons as builders reached a high degree of excellence in their craft, "so that when the cities of the empire of Gaul and the fortresses on the Rhine were destroyed, Constantius Chlorus, A.D. 298, sent to Britain for and employed British architects in repairing and re-edifying them" (_Archaeologia_, vol. ix. p. 100).

Mr. Coote affirms that _Collegia_ existed here after the final departure of the Romans from the island, and that the Saxons found them here, and did not interfere with them. Now if _Collegia fabrorum_, which certainly existed in Britain throughout the Roman occupation, were still in existence during the Saxon occupation, it needs explanation why the earliest missionaries to the Saxons had to bring or to send abroad for workmen to build churches.

On the Continent the barbarians who overran Italy dreaded the influence of the _Collegia_, and vigorously suppressed them, prohibiting them everywhere under the hardest penalties; under such circ.u.mstances we can understand that the societies in Rome could scarcely escape observation, and we shall be prepared to hear that the college of architects and builders in that city removed from thence and took refuge elsewhere. According to tradition they settled at or near Comum, where in mediaeval times, under the t.i.tle of Comacine Masters, they gained fame as architects, and their services were in much request throughout the Continent and beyond it. Had the barbarians, however, treated the Roman colleges with the same indifference as the Saxons are reputed to have shown towards them in England, all guilds of artists and artisans must, for a time at least, have ceased to exist, or have removed from Rome, where there was no longer any appreciation of art, or demand for their services.

It is true there is no doc.u.mentary evidence to prove the continuous existence of the _Collegia_ from Roman to mediaeval times, or to show that the Roman college, which removed to Comum, was identical with the Comacine Guild which emerged from the darkness which shrouds the history of those early times;--there is, however, such evidence as can be derived from the similarity of the inst.i.tutions, in their aims and const.i.tutions. In the latter inst.i.tution even the t.i.tle of _Magister_ was retained, though the use of the term was no longer limited to the president of the body, every competent and fully instructed member of the society was admitted to the order of _Magistri_,[102]--possibly because these members formed the governing body--and the president became a Grand Master. The members generally were called _Liberi muratori_--Freemasons--because they were not subject to the sumptuary and other laws which regulated the work and pay of ordinary workmen.[103]

Comum, which possessed all the privileges of a Roman _municipium_, stood at the head of Lacus Larii--the Lake of Como--on the northern sh.o.r.es of which, from Como to the island of Comacina, P. Strabo and C.

Scipio settled Greek colonies, which Julius Caesar added to and consolidated. The names of villages on these sh.o.r.es of the lake are still some guide to its extent and limits. Comum was made the chief seat of the colony.

After the fall of the Empire, this Romano-Greek colony seems to have withstood the attacks of the barbarians, and preserved its independence for a long time. At the time of the invasion of Italy by the Longobards, the whole of the northern end of the lake was in the hands of the imperial (Byzantine) party, and it was not until the year 586 that the island of Comacina fell into the hands of the Longobard King Autharis, though the lake and country northwards of the island seem to have still continued under imperial rule. The country around Comum, therefore, remained in comparative quiet, and if much progress in art was not possible, there at least it did not become altogether degenerate.

The Greek influence was evidently strong in the colony. Even the bishop in the latter end of the fifth century was a Greek, for S.

Abbondio, who died Bishop of Comum in 489, had previously held the bishopric of Thessalonica; possibly other bishops of that diocese were of the same nationality: it would be surprising if the Roman architectural college, which took refuge there, had been altogether unaffected by it, particularly as the Romans derived their knowledge of architecture as well as of art from the Greeks, and Greek architecture was at all times treated by the great Roman architects with respect, as we learn from Vitruvius; besides, with the fall of the Empire, all progress in Roman art had ceased, and Byzantium was the quarter to which men looked for instruction in Christian and secular art.[104] It could only be that the work of a Roman society of architects in the midst of a Greek colony would show marked traces of Byzantine influence, and none the less because in all probability there were Byzantine societies of a similar kind beside it.

Muller says, after the fall of Rome, Constantinople was regarded as the centre of mechanical and artistic skill, and a knowledge of art radiated from it to distant countries.[105]

Let us turn our attention now to Britain. The Italian chroniclists relate that Pope Gregory in A.D. 598 sent over the monk Augustine to convert the British, and with him several of the fraternity of _Liberi muratori_ (Freemasons), so that the converts might speedily be provided with churches, oratories, and monasteries; also that Augustine, in 604, despatched the priest Lorenzo and the monk Pietro back to Rome with a letter to Pope Gregory, begging him to send more architects and workmen, which he did.[106] We shall presently see, that although Bede does not say in so many words that Augustine was accompanied by architects and builders, yet that is the only inference which can be drawn from his words, and from Pope Gregory's instructions to Mellitus.

It was a common practice in mediaeval times for missionaries, whether bishops or monks, to have in their train builders and stone-cutters, and they themselves were often skilful architects. St. Hugh of Lincoln was not the only bishop who could plan a church, instruct the workmen, and handle a hod.[107]

Even female saints appear to have included in their retinue, persons who were capable of building churches, though the followers of St.

Modwen,[108] who, on landing in England from Ireland about A.D. 500, left her attendants to erect a church at Streneshalen, near the Arderne forest, while she went to visit the king, may have been only capable of building in wattle-work or in wood, "of hewn oak covered with reed," "after the manner of the Scots." Bede (iii. 25) describes the church of Lindisfarne as "a church of stone," that material not being usual amongst the Britons (iii. 4); still it is one instance among many, of the prevalence of the custom for missionaries, whether priests, monks, or nuns, to take in their train on their missionary journeys workmen experienced in building, and to employ them where necessary to build churches for their converts.

Professor Merzario states, on the authority of ancient MSS., that the architects and builders sent were _Liberi muratori_. Now, the members of the Comacine Society were known and are described in ancient MSS.

under that t.i.tle; besides, what other guild would Gregory be likely to invite to send members to join the mission?--were there indeed any other building guilds existing at the time, except the Byzantine societies. It is certainly not probable that Gregory would have invited Greek _etairia_ to send members with the Roman mission, to build churches "after the Roman manner," which is what the first builders in Saxon England did, and in preference to builders belonging to a society which was of Roman origin, and held all the traditions of the Roman school of architecture.

But without the record of the Italian chroniclists it would have been clear to any careful reader that architects accompanied Augustine, and other early as well as the late missionaries to England. The first evidence will be found in Bede (i. 26), where it is stated that after King Ethelbert had been converted to the faith, the missioners built churches and repaired old Romano-British churches in places whither they came, for their converts to worship in.

And again (i. 30), Gregory instructs Mellitus not to destroy the idol temples, but if well built to cleanse them and put altars in them, and convert them into churches. Gregory states that he decided on this course after mature deliberation; which shows that Gregory knew that many of the old Roman temples were still in use, and that Mellitus had with him architects who were qualified to carry out the necessary repairs to them.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIESOLE CATHEDRAL INTERIOR.

_To face page 145._]

Again, in 601, Pope Gregory sent Paulinus and others to a.s.sist Augustine in his work, and by them he sent sacred vessels, ornaments for the church, and vestments. Now experienced architects and builders to build churches for the converts were as necessary as the ornaments wherewith to furnish them, and it is fair to conclude that this essential had not been overlooked, and that there were with those who brought the ornaments, men competent to erect the churches to place them in. Indeed it seems possible that Paulinus himself may have graduated in the Comacine school of architecture; it is a curious fact that he is spoken of under the t.i.tle of _Magister_,[109] the t.i.tle given to fully-instructed members of that order, and we know that many monks were amongst the enrolled members of the Comacine body.

The strongest evidence, of course, would be the evidence of his work as a builder; unfortunately very little of that remains--though the little we know about it is consistent with the fact that either he was of that order, or he had Comacine Masters with him. The Whalley cross which is attributed to him is ornamented with that peculiar convoluted ornament which is found in early Comacine work; and he was certainly a great builder of churches, of the precise type which the Comacines would have built at that time. Bede relates that he built in Lincoln a stone church of beautiful workmanship, in which he consecrated Honorius, Bishop of Canterbury, in the place of Justus. The "beautiful workmanship" implies an experienced architect. Bede who thus describes it was a competent witness, and in all probability he knew the church, which was in his time roofless. Again, King Edwin under the direction of Paulinus built a "large and n.o.ble church of stone" at York (ii.

14). At this time the Comacine builders had not begun to build in the style which was afterwards known as the Lombard or Romanesque style, and of which indeed they were the authors, and this church seems to have been an Italian Basilican church with an atrium at the west end as was customary in churches of the period; this particular atrium being built round the little wooden oratory which Edwin had put up when under the instruction of the bishop, before his baptism, the oratory being in the midst of the open court.

The Basilican church of the period has been so often described that it will not be necessary to give a detailed description of it. It generally consisted of a nave, with two aisles separated from the nave by arcades; at one end (sometimes at both) the building terminated in an apse, of which the floor was raised; this raised floor in later times projected into the nave and was protected by a railing.[110] The altar was in the centre of the string of the arc of the apse, and round the arc were seats for the clergy, the bishop's throne being in the centre, in the place which would be occupied in a Roman heathen Basilica by the presiding magistrate. Beneath the raised floor of the apse was the _confessio_ or crypt, in which the body or relics of the saint to whom the church was dedicated were deposited. Plans of several Saxon crypts still remaining in England will be found in Mr.

Micklethwaite's valuable paper in the _Archaeological Journal_, New Series, vol. iii. No. 4.

At a little later period a further change was made; on the floor of the nave from the chancel westward a s.p.a.ce was divided off by a low screen, in each side of which was a _bema_ or pulpit; from which the Gospel and Epistle were read, and the services sung by the Canonical singers.[111] A very complete screen of a little earlier date than St.

Augustine may still be seen in the church of San Clemente, Rome; the ancient church from which it was removed is underneath the present church; westward of the church was the atrium, an open court surrounded by a colonnade; the atrium seems to have been used in some British churches for the canons, who had cells round it.

[Ill.u.s.tration: S. CLEMENTE, ROME. INTERIOR SHOWING ANCIENT SCREEN.

_To face page 146._]

St. Cadoc early in the sixth century built a church in Lancarvan monastery, which monastery he rebuilt; each of the thirty-six canons had a residence _in atrio_,[112] the residence being probably a cell with a door opening into the atrium, such as may still be observed in some old monastic cloisters on the Continent. There is evidence of an atrium at the west end of Brixworth church, and the construction of the bas.e.m.e.nts of the towers at St. Mary, Deerhurst, at Monkswearmouth, and Barton-on-Humber, seems to show that there was a similar construction at the west end of those churches.

The church of S. Ambrogio, Milan, possesses an atrium built by the Comacines, but it is of much later date, and would therefore afford a general idea of an early Saxon church atrium only in plan.

Though we have little ornament of the early Saxon period, and that little is mainly limited to the ornamentation on early Christian crosses and fonts, it is clearly of the same character as Comacine work. The convoluted ornament on Paulinus' cross at Whalley has been noticed; similar work may be seen on the Kirkdale cross, Bewcastle and Ruthwell crosses, Crowle and Yarm crosses, and others in England and Ireland. On the Bewcastle and Ruthwell crosses there are stiff flower convolutions with birds and beasts on the branches. Collingham cross has interlacing monsters, and on others are panels sculptured in representation of Scripture subjects and characters. Some of these crosses are decorated with another and very mark-worthy ornament, consisting of bands of interlaced work. These bands are sometimes of a single strand, but more frequently of three strands. An interlaced ornament of this kind was found on the Corinthian base of a column in the church of S. Pra.s.sede in Rome. On comparing these interlaced patterns and convolutions with the carving on the ambo in the Basilica of S. Ambrogio, Milan, which is Comacine work, it will be seen how nearly they correspond; whilst the ornaments and sculptured figures in the facade and round the portals of the doors of S. Michele, Pavia, an early Lombard church of the eighth century, show treatment similar to Saxon work. It appears to me possible that this facade has been rebuilt presumably about the twelfth century, but there can be little doubt that the carvings as well as a considerable portion of the church itself are of the earlier date.[113]

All the crosses above-mentioned bear Runic inscriptions upon them, but on examination it will be seen that these inscriptions are generally by another hand, and of ruder workmanship than the carving of the crosses. Sometimes they are little more than scratches, and in one, namely, the Yarm cross, a panel was evidently left by the carver for the inscription, which was afterwards cut upon it, but being too small, the last two lines had to be compressed to be got into the s.p.a.ce. In the Kirkdale and Lancaster crosses, the runes are certainly inferior in workmanship, and they seem to have been an afterthought.

The borders on which they are cut do not appear as if they were originally intended to bear them.

The date of the fragment of the Yarm cross is fixed by the inscription, if it has been correctly read, being dedicated to Bishop Trumberht, Bishop of Hexham, who lived towards the close of the seventh century.